    [From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
    NOAA
    COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
    2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE
    CHARLESTON', SC 29405-2413
    property of CSC Libr&Y
    HURRICANE
    EA lCULIT0I )N
    STUDYwN3at
    Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council
    'I
    DECEMBER 1987

    -The preparation of this report was primarily supported by a grant
    from the U.S.  Office of Coastal Management, National Oceanic and
    Atmospheric  Administration;  and  the Florida Office of  Coastal
    :Management, Department of Environmental Regulation throagh the
    Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972,  as  amended.   Supplemental
    funding was provided by the Florida Department of Community
    Affairs, Division of Emergency Management.
    .I-

    Ii

    _T
    sr
    CN

    TABLE OF CONTENTS

    PART                                                 PAGE #

    Introduction ..................................... i

    I. Threat and Methodologies ......................... I-1

    A. Hazard Analysis Update ...................... I-1
    B. Methodologies ................................ 1-2
    1.  Estimates of Population.... ........... 1-2
    2. Behavioral data ............1.......... I-3
    3. Shelter Inventory ...... ................ 1-5
    4.  Pre-Eye Landfall Hazard Times- Point
    Inundation ............................. 1-5
    5.  Pre-Eye Landfall Hazard Times - Gale
    Force Winds ............................ 1-5
    6.  Roadway Inundation Due to Rainfall ...... 1-5
    7. Evacuation Route Capacities .............-5
    8. Route Assignments ....................... 1-6
    9. Shelter Assignments ..... ............... i-6
    10. Loadings, Clearance, and Evacuation
    Times .................................. 1-7
    11. 1991 Estimates .......................... 1-7

    1I. County Plans .....................................

    A. Collier ......................................I1-A
    (See County Table of Contents)
    B. Lee ..........................................I1-B
    C. Charlotte ....................................I1-C
    D. Sarasota .....................................1I-B
    E. Hendry .......................................II-E
    F. 1 Glades .......................................II-F

    III. Regional Summary ..................... ............III-1

    Background Traffic, Present and 1991 .............111-1
    Intercounty Loadings ...........................111-5

    IV. Critique and Elaboration ......................... IV-1

    Behavior - Destination Change..................... TV-1
    Behavior - Response Times ...... .................. IV-3
    Shelters and Shelter Space ....................... IV-5
    Roadways Level of Service ......V-.
    Mobile Homes Park Self Sufficiency ............... IV-8
    Shelter Impacts ................................ IV-8
    Evacuation Time Impacts ........................ IV-9
    Early Tourist Evacuation .....................I.... V-10
    Survey Data and Use; The Feedback Loop ........... IV-11
    Impact of Evacuation Orders ..................... IV-12

    V. Technical Appendix ...............................
    (See Technical Appendix Table of Contents)

    LIST OF MAPS AND FIGURES
    MAP
    PACE #
    Collier County Maps
    Lee County Maps
    Charlotte County Maps
    Sarasota County Maps
    Hendry County Maps
    Glades County Maps
    Intercounty Trip Volumes
    Intercounty Routes and Capacities
    See Collier County Section
    See Lee County Section
    See Charlotte County Section
    See Sarasota County Section
    See Hendry County Section
    See Glades County Section
    -~.    III-4
     .; l 1III-7
    TABLE SUBJECT
    PAGE #
    Behavioral. Survey Results within the 11
    Planning Regions of Florida
    Collier County Tables	See ColliE
    Lee County Tables	See Lee C4
    Charlotte County Tables	See Charl(
    Sarasota County Tables	See Saras(
    Hendry County Tables	See Hendr
    Glades County Tables	See Glade:
    Intercounty Travel, 1987, 1991
    Route Loadings
    Multi-County Vehicle Loadings
    Single County Loading Times
    Multi-County Loading Times
    Multi-County Loading Times, with Background
    Traffic
    Revised Loadings, 34% of Evacuees Leaving
    County
    Revised Single County Loading Times
    Rlevised Multi-County Loading Times
    Decision Times, Severe and Two-Hour Responses
    Unmet Incounty-Public or Private Shelter Demand
    Reduced Space Option
    Roadway Service Level Reductions, Select Links
    Public Shelter Space without Mobile Home
    Residents
    Reduction in Loaiding Times, Mobile Home On-
    ,Site Sheltering
    Increase in Shelter Space, without Hotel/Motel
    Residents
    Decrease in Evacuation Times, no Hotel/Motel
    Residents
    I-4
    er County Section
    ounty Section
    otte County Section
    ota County Section
    y County Section
    s County Section
    III-1
    III-2
    III-5
    III-6
    III-8

    III-9

    IV-1
    IV-2
    IV-2
    IV-4
    IV-6          -  -
    IV-6
    IV-8
    IV-9

    IV-9

    IV-10

    IV-l 1

    SOUTHWEST FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP

    CHAIRMAN ......Commissioner Joseph A. Tringali
    VICE CHAIRMAN ......Commissioner John B. Coffey
    SECRETARY ......Commissioner Anne Goodnight
    'TREASURER ......Commissioner Donald Slisher
    CHARLOTTE COUNTY

    ICommissioner Richard Holt
    Commissioner Joseph Tringali
    NCouncilwoman Phyllis Smith
    Mr. D. Michael Singletary
    Mr. Thoma's D'Andrea

    ICOLLIER COUNTY

    Commissioner Anne Goodnight
    Commissioner John A. Pistor
    3Councilman William F. Bledsoe
    Mr. Stanley W. Hole
    Ms. B. Henderson-Cawley

    IGLADES CO UNTY

    Commissioner W.W. Busbee
    ,Commissioner John Coffey
    Commissioner Harry Ogletree
    HENDRY COUNTY

    Commissioner Donald Pratt
    Commissiobner Chuck Hall
    Mr., g. L. Bennett
    Mayor-Thomas A. Smith

    LEE COUNTY

    Commissioner Donald Slisher
    Commissioner Porter Goss
    Councilman Fred Valtin
    Mr. Richard Holzinger
    Mr. Gordon Meiers

    SARASOTA COUNTY

    Commissioner Jerry Hente
    Commissioner Jeanne McElmurray
    Commissioner Rita J. Roehr
    Mr. Douglas James
    SOUTHWEST FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL STAFF

    WAYNE E. DALTRY ......EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

    DAVID Y. BURR ......PLANNING DIRECTOR
    Glen R. Ahlert
    Al Barrett
    Betty Bursiek
    Rick Carpenter
    Becky Crawford
    Terrence S. Dolan
    .Nancy A. Furdell
    :'Susan Gill
    Glenn Heath
    Celeste Holloway
    William B. Horner
    David M. Loveland.
    Daniel J. Mischo
    James E. Newton II
    Rachel Reith
    .'Michael Streets
    Daniel L. Trescott . ..

    I

    HURRICANE EVACUATION STUDY
    UPDATE 1987

    Introduction

    The purpose of this update is to refine and improve upon the work
    initially  performed	in the Regional Hurricane Evacuation  Plan_
    SWFRPC,	1982,  and	the Hurricane Evacuation  Plan,  Update  82,
    m SWFRPC,	1984.    The   major   change  in  this  update  is   a
    reorganization of salient information on a county-by-county
    basis, to be more useful to local emergency management  officials
    and  to  assist  local governments in 'meeting their  mandates  in
    accordance with Rule 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code.

    I  .The Plan is organized in the following manner

    PART I. Threat and Methodologies

    I, !:A Hurricane is a regional threat;  as such,  it will  affect
    more  than one locality.   This section will update the work
    analyzing hurricanes performed in 1981.   This section  will
    also summarize the methodologies in use for each step of the
    evacuation  study,  with  emphasis on their  application  to
    local government.

    PART II.	County Studies

    Each	of the six counties will be assessed as to the  degree
    I.            the	hurricane threat affect them.
    	Vulnerability zone will
    be	reassessed,   population  data	will  be  updated   and
    forecasted to 1991,  behavioral information will be applied,
    shelter  data updated,  evacuation  routes  reassessed,  and
    clearance times will be calculated.

    i    PART iii.  Regional Summary

    The County data will be summarized for their relevance-t~
    inter-county action. Specific analysis will be performed on
    I  '         inter-county travel volume and routes.

    PART IV.  Critique

    Various	shortcomings  or  variations  in  current  planning
    ' activity	will be assessed.  Alternatives in priorities will
    be examined as to whether different approaches, assumptions,
    or actions will improve evacuation times.

    In  addition to the four parts above,  these will be a  technical
    i       appendix containing analyses on:
    (1)  public safety policies and concepts of operations.
    I

    (2)  assessment of potential highway improvements to improve
    clearance times, including traffic control points and
    debris removal resource storage points

    (3)  assessment of relatively low cost shelter improvements,
    and

    (4)  the impact on evacuation of drawbridge openings

    (a) drawbridge openings,
    (b)  high profile,  trailer hauling,  and RV  vehicles,
    and
    (c) tourists,
    (d) route control.

    There are icertain high interest aspects of evacuations which the
    different county chapters and regional summary assume as actions.
    These include the response of tourists, the impact on highways of
    "truck" traffic, which includes high profile and recreational
    vehicles, and the imnpact of rainfall and hurricane wind and flood
    waters  on  road  capacities.    The  county  sections,  regional
    summary, and critique sections also address the subject of
    mobilization times, background traffic, and "daylight" versus
    "midnight' highway activity. Future updates will examine further
    salient alternatives affecting successful evacuation.
    I
    i

    I
    I

    I

    COLLIER COUNTY - TABLE OF CONTENTS
    Section
    Page #
    Hurricane Vulnerability .............................. II-A-1
    Recent Storm History ............................T.....--A-4
    Affected Population ............................T......I-A--9
    Motor Vehicles .............:.........................TI-A-14
    Shelters .............................................I-A-]5
    Routes ................................................ II-A-19
    Clearance Times ......................................TI-A-24
    199] Forecasts .......................................T.TII-A-32
    APPENDIX - Hazard Times ............... .......... ....1
    LIST OF MAPS
    Map
    Page #
    1. SLOSH Model Storm History Points .................. TI-A-2
    2. Maximum Areas Subject to Flooding .................II-A-3
    3. Socio-Economic Zones .............................. I--A-l10
    4. Evacuation Zones ..................................II-A--ll.
    r)5.  Red Cross Managed Public Shelter Locations ........ II-A-16
    6. Evacuation Routes .................................. IT-A-23
    7.  Routes Subject to Rainfall Flooding ............... II-A-25
    LIST OF TABLES
    Table
    Page #
    Il1. Predicted Coastal Storm Surges .................... II-A-4
    m2.  lHurricane Simulated by Surge Model .................II-A-5
    3. Selected Storm Tracks ............................. II-A-8
    4. 1987 Housing UTnits ................................ II-A-12
    | ~5. Population Estimates .............................. II-A-13
    6. Vehicle Estimates ................................. TI-A-15
    7. Shelters .......................................... TI-A--]7
    *    R8. Public Shelter Capacity ...........................TI-A-17
    *          i 9. Population Displacement Ratio .....................II-A-18
    10. Shelter Satisfaction ..............................I-A-19T
    11.  Evacuation Route Capacity Calculation .............I-A-20
    37   12. Pre-Landfall Flood Conditions .....................II-A-26
    13. Shelter Designations and Options .................. II-A-26
    14. Time to Clear ..................................... II-A-28
    | *15. Ultimate Constricting Route ....................... II-A-29
    16. County Exiting Rou tes  .I............................I-A-30
    17. Total Evacuation Time ................ ............... II-A-3l
    *s 018. Housing Units, 1991 ...............................II--A-33
    *  l19. Population Estimates, 1991 ........................IT-A-32
    20. Motor Vehicle Estimates, 1991 ...................... II-A-34
    *9 21. Refvised Capacities .......................II-A-35
    22.  Shelter Satisfactions, 1991 ...................... II-A-36
    23. Revised Time to Clear, 1991 .......................II-A-36
    24. Exiting Routes, 1991 ..............................It-A-38
    25.  Total Time, 1991                  II-A-39
    ~~................ ..!IA3

    COLLIER COUNTY
    NATURAL DISASTER PLAN (Hurricanes)

    119J-5.012(2) (e) (i)I

    HURRICANE VULNERABILITY

    The hurricane vulnerability of Collier County has been analyzed
    using a numerical stormn surge prediction model known as SLOSH,
    short for Sea, Lake, and overland Surges from Hurricanes. This
    model is described in detail in the Regional Hurricane Evacuation
    Plan-, 1981-82, prepared  by  the  Southwest  Florida  Regional
    I ~Planning Council; as well as A Storm -Surgre Atlas for Southwest
    Florida,   prepared  by  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric
    Administration,  Undated,  @1983).  .These reports analyzed some
    187 separate storms for their poten-tial -impact on Southwest
    I   ~Florida,  including  Collier  County.   Both reports  provide  an
    assessment of methodologies and provide assumptions that can act
    towards   increasing  or  decreasing  forecast  flood  and   wind
    Conditions.   However,  in summary, the following assumptions can

    (1) Landfalling storms provide the worst flooding potential

    (2) Flooding will be worse south of the eye of the hurricane

    I    ~(3)  Wind  conditions making roads unsafe for travel will  arrive
    well before the eye of the hurricane, and usually before
    *	~~flood waters inundate evacuation routes

    (4)	Storm  landfall  prediction is not an  exact  science.   Any
    approaching storm has the capacity to strengthen or veer,
    decreasing or increasing the flooding and surge potential of

    *	~The  SLOSH model used thirteen points in Collier County for	time
    *	~history  analysis.   These  points are depicted on  Map  1.	The _
    greatest heighft of stormwaters for each category storm for ewch-
    point are summarized in Table I.

    The SLOSH model also provided maps of the flooding that may be
    expected in Collier County.   The 187 different simulations  have
    been summarized by flood category, and a zone for each category
    *    ~has  been	created  depicting  the  maximum	extent  of	flooding
    resulting	from  all of the storms of that	category.	The  five
    3    ~zones thus created are depicted on Map 2.
    II-A-1

    A	STORM HISTORY POINTS

    1	ClIOKOLOSKEE ISLAND                V  .l.  1
    2	CARNESTOWN                                                 . //	2
    3	ROYAL PALM HAMMOCK	20
    4	GOODLAND
    S	MARCO ISLAND
    6	MARCO BRIDGE  )
    7	ISLE OF CAPRI  _
    8	NAPLES MANOR
    9	EMERGENCY OPERATIONS
    CENTER
    10	NAPLES
    11	PINE RIDGE                                                 '
    12	NAPLES PARK                                          -
    13	BONITA SPRINGS                                  20
    st\ IOi29aB                                                                                                                               I

    I
    100                                                                                                                        I

    *  5

    O I 2 3 4 MILES \{e
    SWFRPC RNC                                                                                                                                 ;

    H    5 FOOT  CONTOUR  LINES

    MAP I1
    COLLIER COUNTY
    SLOSH MODEL STORM HISTORY POINTS

    Il-A-2 2

    C
     LEGEND
    NOTE: FLOOD HEIGHTS
    AT SHORELINE
     UP TO 8 FEET
    ABOVE MEAN
    SEA LEVEL(MSL)

    UP TO 10 FEET
    ABOVE MSL

     m2 UP TO 16 FEET
    l;  IABOVE  MSL

    1 3 g UP TO 17 FEET ABOV
    I        UP TO 18 FEET
    ABOV
    I

    O  2 3 4 5
    E MSL
    iE MSL
    MAP2              --
    COLLIER COUNTY
    MAXIMUM AREAS SUBJECT TO FLOODING
    BY STORM CATEGORY
    SWFRPC 87-RNC
    II-A-3

    !

    TABLE 1                                       I
    PREDICTED COASTAL STORM SURGES SIMULATED BY
    SLOSH MODEL. LANDFALLING STORMS

    (If a point is over water, surge is reported in feet of                 I
    flooding  above msl;  if a point is on land,  surge  is
    reported in feet above land at that point)*

    ELEVATION        STORM CATEGORY
    GRID POINT              OF POINT	1	2	3	4	5

    Chokoloskee Island	4	6	8	14	15	15
    Carnestown	5	4	6	11	15	15
    Royal Palm	4	6.- 6	11	14	16  --
    Goodland	3	6	8	10	13	15i
    Marco Island	3	5	5	8	10	10
    Marco Bridge	4	-	4	7	9.5	9
    Isle of Capri	3	2	5	9	11	11
    Naples Manor	5	-	4	9	11	12
    EOC	5	-	3	7	10	11
    Naples	8	-	-	4	7	7
    Pine Ridge	8	-	-	5	8	8
    Naples Park	10	-	-	3	6.5	5
    Bonita Shores	2	6	8	12	15	15

    Although storms cannot be accurately forecast in regard to  storm
    behavior,  the	187	simulations	did provide insights  into  the
    differences	in	pre-landfall	flooding   for    landfalling,
    paralle.ling,	and	crossing  storms.      These  differences	are
    summarized  in	Table 2 for hurricane eye location and points	of
    worst  impact.	Table 3 summarizes the nature of flood and  wind
    variation based on whether the storm is landfalling, crossing, or
    paralleling.   Appendix 1 summarizes the pre-eye landfall  hazard
    times that the County may experience.

    Recent Storm History

    Hurricane Donna was the last hurricane to affect Collier County
    to  any significant degree.   At the time the hurricane hit,  the
    County's population was 12,000, concentrated primarily in Naples,
    Immokalee  and Everglades City.   Except for the Immokalee  area,
    the	greater part of the County's inhabited areas were  inundated
    by	flood waters.   Damage in Everglades City was so  great  that
    plans to relocate the County seat were.finalized,  and relocation
    was completed in the following year.

    Hurricane  Alberto was a near miss for the County.   This  storm
    formed off the Southwest Florida Coast in 1982,  but decreased in
    intensity to such a degree that it was a tropical depression when
    it made landfall.   However, its actions mimicked those predicted
    by a hurricane by the SLOSH model to the extent that high  waters
    again  inundated  the  Southeast  Collier  Shoreline,  submerging
    Everglades City below approximately three feet of seawater for
    several hours.   There was,  however, no surge force resulting in
    significant damage to property.	3

    II-A-4	I

    TABLE 2
    HURRICANES SIMULATED BY NUMERICAL
    STORM SURGE PREDICTION MODEL
    L	C
    O	A
    C	T
    I
    II
    M	A	E
    0	T	T	G     LANDFALL/EXITING POINT
    D	Y	I	O	:          OR                   AREA RECEIVING
    E	P	0	R	:  CLOSEST APPROACH          MAXIMUM SURGE/WINDS
    L	E	N	Y

    SL	L	5sS	1   :North end. Ft. .Myers Beach    Naples/Bonita

    2	'North

     3	North

    4	:North

    5	North

    1	:South

    2	'South

    3	'South

    4	'South

    5	:South
    (Lee County)
    end, Ft. Myers Beach
    (Lee County)
    end, Ft. Myers Beach
    (Lee County)
    end, Ft. Myers Beach
    (Lee County)
    end, Ft. Myers Beach
    (Lee County)

    end, Ft. Myers Beach
    (Lee County)
    end, Ft. Myers Beach
    (Lee County)
    end, Ft. Myers Beach
    (Lee County)
    end, Ft. Myers Beach
    (Lee County)
    end, Ft. Myers Beach
    (Lee County)
    Shores
    Naples/Bonita
    Shores
    Naples/Bonita
    Shores
    Naples/Bonita
    Shores
    Naples/Bonita
    Shores

    Marco Island/
    Isles of Capri
    Marco Island/
    Isles of Capri
    Marco Island/
    Isles of Capri
    Marco Island/
    Isles of Capri
    Marco Island/
    Isles of Capri
    SL	L	SSS

    SR	L	5SS

    SR	L	5SS

    SR	L	5SS

    SL	L
    	o10SS

    SL	L	10SS

    SL	L	10SS
    SL     L  10SS
    SL      L   IOSS
    I

    I
    I
    I
    I;
    SL	L	15SS
    SL	L	15SS
    SL	L	15SS
    SL	L	15SS
    SL	L	15SS

    SL	L	20SS
    SL	L	20SS
    SL	L	20SS
    SL	L	20SS
    SL	L	20SS
    1	:Bonita Beach (Lee County)
    2	:Bonita Beach (Lee County)
    3	:Bonita Beach (Lee County)
    4	:Bonita Beach (Lee County)
    5	'Bonita Beach (Lee County)

    1 :Bonita Springs (Lee County)
    2	:Bonita Springs (Lee County)
    3	Bonita Springs (Lee County)
    4	:Bonita Springs (Lee County)
    5	Bonita Springs (Lee County)
    Goodland
    Goodland
    Goodland
    Goodland
    Goodland
    Goodland
    Goodland
    Goodland
    Goodlandi
    Goodland
    KEY:
    SL - SLOSH (Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges from
    Hurricanes) Model
    L - Landfalling Hurricane
    C - Crossing Hurricane (Exiting Hurricane)
    P - Paralleling Hurricane
    SS - South of Sanibel Island
    NS - North of Sanibel Island
    II-A-5

    I
    TABLE 2 (Continued)
    HURRICANES SIMULATED BY NUMERICAL
    STORM SURGE PREDICTION MODEL
    I
    L	C	:
    O	A	:
    C	T	:
    A	E	:
    T	T	G	:
    Y	I	O	:
    P	O	R	:
    E	N	Y	:
    M
    0
    D
    E
    L
    LANDFALL/EXITING POINT
    OR
    CLOSEST APPROACH
    AREA RECEIVING
    MAXIMUM SURGE/WINDS
    SL
    SL
    SL
    SL
    SL

    SL
    SL
    SL
    SL
    SL

    SL
    SL
    SL
    SL
    SL

    SL
    SL
    SL
    SL
    SL

    SL
    SL
    SL
    SL
    SL
    L 25SS
    L 25SS
    L 25SS
    L 25SS
    L 25SS

    L 30SS
    L 30SS
    L 30SS
    L 30SS
    L. 30SS

    L 35SS
    L 35SS
    L 35SS
    L 35SS
    L 35SS

    L 40SS
    L 40SS
    L 4OSS
    L  40SS
    L 40SS

    L 45SS
    L 45SS
    L 45SS
    L 45SS
    L 45SS
    1 :
    2

    :
    3

    :
    4 :
    5 :

    1 :
    2 :
    3 :
    4 :
    5

    :

    1	:
    2
     :
    3

    :
    4

    :
    5	:

    1
    2
    3

    :
    4

    :
    5
    Bonita Shores'
    Bonita Shores ...
    Bonita Shores
    Bonita Shores
    Bonita Shores
    Royal Palm
    Royal Palm
    Royal Palm
    Royal Palm
    Royal Palm
    Naples
    Naples
    Naples
    Naples
    Naples
    Royal Palm
    Royal Palm
    Royal Palm
    Royal Palm
    Royal Palm
    Naples Manor
    Naples Manor
    Naples Manor
    Naples Manor
    Naples Manor

    Hurricane Pass
    Hurricane Pass
    Hurricane Pass
    Hurricane Pass
    Hurricane Pass
    Chokoloskee
    Chokoloskee
    Chokoloskee.
    Chokoloskee
    Chokoloskee

    Carnestown
    Carnestown
    Carnestown
    Carnestown
    Carnestown

    Chokoloskee
    Chokoloskee
    Chokoloskee
    Chokoloskee
    Chokoloskee
    Island
    Island
    Island
    Island
    Island
    I
    I

    Island
    Island
    Island
    Island
    Island
    I	: Marco Island
    2	: Marco Island
    3	: Marco Island
    4	: Marco Island
    5	' Marco Island
    !
    I
    - KEY:
    SL - SLOSHI (Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges from
    L - Landfalling Hurricane
    C - Crossing Hurricane (Exiting Hurricane)
    P - Paralleling Hurricane
    SS - South of Sanibel Island
    NS - North of Sanibel Island

    II-A-6
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I

    TABLE 2 (Continuedl
    HURRICANES SIMULATED BY NUMERICAL
    STORM SURGE PREDICTION MODEL
    L	C
    O	A
    C	T
    A	E
    T	T	G
    Y	I	O
    P	O	R
    E	N	Y
    M
    0
    D
    E
    L
    : LANDFALL/EXITING POINT
    AREA RECEIVING
    MAXIMUM SURGE/WINDS
    II
    II
    OR
    CLOSEST APPROACH
    I
    I
    1
    2

    :
    3

    :
    4 :
    5
    :

    1 :
    2

    :
    3
    	1
    :
    SL	L
    SL	L
    SL	L
    SL	L
    SL	L

    SL	P
    SL	P
    SL	P

    SL	P
    SL	P
    SL	P
    O S
    0 S
    O S
    0 S
    O S

    15ES
    15ES
    15ES

    0 S
    0 S
    O S
    Sanibel Island
    Sanibel Island
    Sanibel Island
    Sanibel Island
    Sanibel Island

    Everglades City
    Everglades City
    Everglades City
    Bonita Shores
    Bonita Shores
    Bonita Shores
    Bonita Shores
    Bonita Shores

    Chokoloskee Island
    Chokoloskee Island
    Chokoloskee Island

    Goodland
    Goodland
    Goodland
    1	: 15 mi. west of Sanibel
    2	: 15 mi. west of Sanibel
    3	: 15 mi. west of Sanibel
    KEY:
    SL -
    L
    C -
    p -
    ES -
    WS-
    SLOSH (Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges from
    Landfalling Hurricane
    Crossing Hurricane (Exiting Hurricane)
    Paralleling Hurricane
    East of Sanibel Island
    West of Sanibel Island

    - .
    II-A-7

    I
    I
    TABLE 3
    SELECTED STORM TRACTS BY

    STORM
    CTRARACTERISTICS
    CATEGORY AND TYPE
    I
    STORM
    TRACK
    STORM
    TRACK
    STORM
    CHARACTERISICS
    I
    I
    45SS-L-1
    25SS-L-1
    5SS-L-1
    15NS-L-1
    35NS-L-1
    55NS-L-1
    S(3) Wi0)
    S(3) W(I)
    S(2) W(1)
    5(2)
    S(2)
    5(l)
    15ES-P--
    0 S-P-I
    3OWS-P-1
    5(2)
    S(2)
    S(2)
    I(3)
    S(3)
    S(3)
    5(1)
    W(l)
    W(1)

    w(1)
    W(2)
    W(l)
    15ES-P-2
    0 s'P-2.
    30WS-P-2
    G60WS-FP-2
    I
    45S5-L-2
    25SS-L-2
    5SS-L-2
    L5NS-L-2
    35NS-L-2
    55NS-L-2
    S(3)
    5(3)
    S(3)
    5(2)
    5(2)
    S(2)
    W(2)
    W(2)
    W(2)
    W(I)
    W(1)
    15ES-P-3
    0 S-P-3
    30WS-P-3
    50WS-P-3
    5(3)
    5(4)
    S(3)
    S(2)

    5(1)
    V(1)
    5(1)
    W(2)
    W(3)
    W(2)
    W(1)
    I
    45SS-C-1
    i5SS-C-1
    15NS-C-1
    45SS-L-3
    25SS-L-3
    5SS-L-3
    15NS-L-3
    35NS-L-3
    55NS-L-3
    75NS-L-3
    S (4)
    5(4)
    S(3)
    S(3)
    S(3)
    S(3)
    S(2)
    W(3)
    W(3)
    W(2)
    W(2)
    W(1)
    W(I)
    45SS-C-2
    155-C-2
    15NS-C-2
    45SS--C-3
    155S-C-3
    15NS-C-3
    S(2)
    S(2)
    5(1)
    S(2)
    S(3)
    S(2)
    W(1)
    W(1)

    W(2)
    w(2)
    W(I)
    KEY:           SS -
    NS -
    ES -
    WS -
    5-
    w
    South of Sanibel
    North of Sanibel
    East of Sanibel
    West of Sanibel
    Storm Surge
    Wind (over 40 mph)

    C-
    Landfalling
    Parallel
    Crossing

    ,e
    I
    (1) -
    (2) -
    (3) -
    Category I
    Category 2
    Category 3

    II-A-8
    I
    I
    1
    I
    I
    I
    I

    Hurricane  Floyd provided the area a scare on October  16,  1987.
    3    ~However,~ it  veered  due  east before the  County  received  any
    impacts beyond gale force wind gusts and somewhat higher tides.
    A  voluntary  evacuation order put approximately 600  persons  in
    public shelters and an unknown number in area hotels, homes, and
    out of region locations.
    3    ~Affected Population

    Each  zone  depicted an Map 2 encompasses large segments  of	the
    m	~County   population.	Each	one	h-as  a  certain   degree	of
    3	~Vulnerability  to  the	threat	of	hurri,cane  induced  flooding.
    -	~Category I zones have the most repeated 'threat potential, whereas
    it is highly unlikely (but the potentiail exists) that category 5
    areas wIill need to evacuate during the comprehensive plan
    horizon.
    *	~Each  zone  as  drafted mimaics  the  coastline.   Geographically,
    3	~however,  these zones are too cumbersome to assess the timing and
    shelter needs of the population.   Consequently,  in  association
    with the Collier County Planning Department, new subzones were
    3	~created  consistent	with the socio-economic blocks used  by  the
    *	~Department.   These	are  depicted in Map  3.   These  sub-zones,
    however, are not particularly associated with neighborhood or
    3	~community identities.  Consequently, for identification purposes,
    * I	sub-zones  are  reaggregated into communities which have commonly
    understood names. These commuDities are depicted on Map 4

    3    ~The  first element in preparing an estimate of County  population
    is to estimate dwelling units,  and dwelling unit  types.   Using
    * Planning	Department  information of the County and the	City	o f
    Naples,	supplemented  by  information  on  RV  Parks	from	the
    Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, it is estimated
    that  there  are 84,871 dwellings in the county.   This  estimate
    * includes	conventional housing,  mobile homes,  and  transitional
    I   ~housing	such as inhabited travel trailers,  and hotel and  motel-~
    units. The greatest concentration of thes~e, 55.l?% are located -in-
    the Category I Zone.   Table 4 provides the estimate of  dwelling
    units in the County by Flood zone and by community name.
    Using the housing unit estimate, a population estimate is then
    3    ~made.   Two additional factors, however, are needed:  persons per
    household,   and  vacancy  rate.. Persons  per  household  were
    estimated to be a standard 2.4 in Cboll'ier County, regardless of
    3	~unit.   Whereas this assumption has inaccuracies,	the end result
    *	~probably  does  not  differ significantly from  a	more  detailed
    analysis. More detailed analysis, however, is required to assess
    E    ~thie impact of vacancy rates for unit types,  since different unit
    types have different vulnerability to flood or wind hazards.
    * Using  a survey estimate prepared by telephone survey in  October
    1987, two estimates of seasonal vacancy for Southwest Florida
    3    ~were prepared. These are as follows-
    11-A-9

    -1b

    .~     L i         1
    f,

    'II,     -_.-

    I -_--_
    I                                         -

    K    -                      ___

    -*  ..  0*.  -.
    0* ,_. iIz_         I

    _

    x	I-i                 _A-
    *	IL

    _ _
    I- -u---        7-__-
    i_-I
    -ml -
    / *
    r     I<.?__ L    _

    - --

    -St..--    . - -   _     /

    /

    II
    I .                           ?
    -i .

    X

    COLLIER COUNTY
    H
    H

    I
    I

    I
    .... " I
    I
    * SCIOMAP 3

    1 S	CIOECONOMIC ZONES

    -     -    -    -IIII  -iIii    -    -	-              -                   m      -    -

    NORTHEAST
    COUNTY
    0
    CORKSCREW/IMMOKALEE
    GOLDEN GATE/SUNNYLAND:
    3
    NORTH NAPLES/
    GOLDEN GATE
    3

    I

    I C
    0
    I
    FAKAHATCHEE/COPELAND
    2
    I
    I

    m
    B- IG
    CYPRESS
    I 9

    -NO        I ,:   2: 3:4 MILES
    SWFRPC RNC
    I
    I
    I
    I
    l
    EVERGLADES CITY/
    CHOKOLOSKEE
    -I -
    MAP 4
    COLLIER COUNTY
    EVACUATION ZONES
    II-A-11

    TABLE 4
    COLLIER COUNTY - 1987 HOUSING UNITS

    Storm	Residential	Mobile Rome/	Multi-	lotel/
    Category           Zone	Single-Family	Rec. Vehicle	Family
    Duplex	Motel   Total

    I	Everglades City/Chokoloskee	235	221	15	8	29	508
    1	Goodland/Ten Thousand Islands	124	290	45	44	197	700
    1        Htenderson Creek	2,217	1,852	5,416	36    2,046	11,567
    1   South Naples/Rookery Bay	3,936	1,590	5,861	613
    325	12,325
    1           Naples Beaches	7,439              947	9,543	723	3,004	21,656

    TOTAL           ZONE 1	13,951           4,900	20,880       1,424	5,601	46,756

    2           East Naples	3,080	960	4,952         882
    269	10,143
    2      Fakahatchee/Copeland           291	771           186           0        0	1,248

    H	TOTAL           ZONE 2	3,371	1,731	5,138          882
    269	11,391
    m	TOTALS CATEGORY 1 + 2	17,322	6,631	26,018	2,306
    5,870	58,147

    9  3    North Naples/Golden Gate	9,069	1,277	6,742	1,334
    125	18,547
    3      Golden Gate/Sunnyland	1,550              100            7            0
    0	1,657

    TOTAL            ZONE 3	10,619	1,377	6,749	.1,334
    125	20,204
    TOTALS CATEGORY I - 3	27,941	8,008	32,767	3,640
    5,995	78,351

    4     Corkscrew/Immokalee	1,293	1,727	1,924	132	60	5,136

    TOTAL   .        ZONE 4	1,293	1,727	1,924	132	60	5,136
    TOTALS CATEGORY I - 4	29,234	9,735	34,691        3,772
    6,055	83,487

    5       Northeast County	564	168	282	61	41	1,116
    5          Big Cypress	109	84	75	0	0       268

    TOTAL           ZONE 5	1	673	252	357	61	41	1,384
    TOTALS CATEGORY 1 - 5	129,907           9,987       35,048        3,833
    6,096	84,871

    _ m_ mm m mmm _m _m

    Unit Type               Seasonal Occupancy Rates
    July             November

    Single-Family Unit	100%	100%
    Apartment	70.0	78.0
    Condominium (Conventional)	51.0	64.0
    Mobile Home	43.0	75.0
    Travel Trailer	18.0	41.0
    Motel/Hlotel	54.0	63.0

    From  these  estimates,  Collier County is estimated in  1987  to
    contain an average 136,599 persons in July and 160,154 persons at
    the start of November.	This is summarized by community in Table
    5.   Numerically,  the	greatest seasonality occurs in  Hurricane
    Category Zone 1, which has 76,013 persons in July and 89,699 in
    November, an increase of 18.0%.

    TABLE 5
    COLLIER COUNTY POPULATION ESTIMATES
    FOR EVACUATION ZONES

    Storm	Population Estimate
    Category          Zone	July         November

    I        Everglades City/                799         1,020
    Chokoloskee
    Goodland/Ten Thousand             937         1,265
    Islands
    Hfenderson Creek;            16,749        20,976
    South Naples/
    Rookery Bay	20,511	24,177
    Naples Beaches	37,017	42,261
    Mobile Homes, not otherwise	3,968	8,425
    included in the above flood
    prone areas (Category 2-5 Areas)

    SUBTOTAL	79,981	98,124

    2          East Naples	17,309	20,069
    Fakahatchee/Copeland	1,551	2,296
    Mobile Homes, not otherwise	2,618	5,558
    included in the above flood
    prone areas (Category 3-5 Areas)

    NEW EVACUEES	17,510	19,498
    TOTAL 1 - 2	97,491	117,62.2.

    3     North Naples/Golden Gate	35,262	38,925
    Golden Gate/Sunnyland	3,808	3,898
    Mobile Homes, not otherwise	1,544	3,277
    included in the above flood
    prone areas (Category 4-5 Areas)

    NEW EVACUEES	37,996	40,542
    TOTAL 1 - 3	135,487	158,164

    II-A-13

    TABLE 5 (ContinuedI
    COLLIER COUNTY POPULATION ESTIMATES
    FOR EVACUATION ZONES

    Storm	Population Estimate
    Category          Zone	July         November

    4      Corkscrew/Immokalee              7,451         9,697
    Mobile Homes, not otherwise           197           417I
    included in the above flood
    prone areas (Category 5 Area)	.

    NEW EVACUEES	&,'194        6,837
    TOTAL 1-4                 141,681       165,001

    5      Northeast County                 2,064         2,328
    Big Cypress                     430           531

    NEW EVACUEES                2,297         2,442

    TOTAL                    143,978       167,443

    Motor Vehicles

    Nearly  all  of the population affected by an oncoming  hurricane
    will evacuate by private vehicle.   The question arises as to how
    many vehicles will be used in the evacuation. Issues relevant to
    this  include the number of :,vehicles owned,  whether owners would
    be willing to leave any vehicles behind (since next to the home,
    vehicles are the most expensive possession),  whether all drivers
    feel  confident  to operate a vehicle in  storm  conditions,  and
    whether evacuating families wish to be separated in different
    motor   vehicles.    Based  on  surveys,   respondents  indicated
    approximately 75% of available vehicles would be used in an
    evacuation.   (CHurricane Evacuation Plan, 1981-82, SWFRPC).  This--
    averaged out to 1.1 vehicles per occupied unit.

    Using this ratio of cars and the occupancy ratio used previously,            I
    the county potential total of vehicles used in an evacuation in
    July would be 65,955,  and in November would be 76,745.  Category
    h  Zones  again  have the greatest  number  of  vehicles,  34,846
    (36,665 with mobile homes outside the area) in July and 41,114
    (44,976  with mobile homes) in November.;'  Table 6 summarizes the
    vehicle generation by each community.

    I
    I
    I

    II-A-14                                        I

    TABLE 6
    COLLIER COUNTY VEHICLE ESTIMATES
    FOR EVACUATION

    SEASON
    MOBILE	(MOBILE
    HOMES)	HOMES)
    CATEGORY     ZONE           JULY      TRAVEL   NOVEMBER	TRAVEL
    TRAILER	TRAILER

    1    Everglades City/      373     ( 79)         468	(  168)
    Chokoloskee
    1	Goodland             429	(  104)       579	(  220)
    1	Henderson Creek	7,677	( 662)	9,615	(1,406)
    1	South Naples	9,401	( 568)	11,082	(1,207)
    1	Naples Beaches	16,966	( 339)	19,370	(  719)

    2	East Naples	7,933	( 343)	9,198	( 729)
    2	Fakahatchee           712	( 276)	1,052	( 585)

    3	North Naples	16,162	( 457)	17,840	( 969)
    3	Golden Gate	1,745	(  36)	1,787	(   76)

    4	Corkscrew	3,414	( 617)	4,444	(1,311)

     5	Northeast County	946	(	60)	1,067	(	128)
    5	Big Cypress	197	(	30)        243	(	64)
    -----------------------------------------------------------------
    65,955     (3,571)    76,745      (7,582)

    Shelters

    Evacuees must have a place to go.   The SWFRPC undertook  surveys
    in 1979 and 1981 to determine evacuee preferences.   This data is
    summarized as follows:	public shelters (24%), leaving the County
    (34%),	visit  friends	or  go to hotel or stay home  or  "other"-
    (21%.),	"don't know" (21%).   Those are preference  declarationis;
    other studies indicate there is a significant variation from
     preference	to actual behavior.   Additionally,  the severity  of
    impending	storms  may  also  change  decisions,   as   increased
    community-wide evacuation limits or eliminates the hotel/friends/
    public shelter/stay home prediction.

    At  this  time,  the  County has nine  public  shelters,  with  a
    capacity (at 20 square feet per person) of 12,200 persons. These
    shelters are summarized in Table 7,  by vulnerability zone.  They
    are depicted on Map 5.

    Based upon the evacuees forecast in Table 5, the county has
    limited  public shelter capacity.   For example,  the county  can
    accommodate  15.2% of the evacuees of Category 1 storm	in  July,
    but  only  12.4% in November.   Table 8 summarizes  the	County's
    public shelter capacities for storms.
    IT-A-15

    I
    SHELTERS &
    1. BARRON COLLIER HIGH SCHOOL
    2. BIG CYPRESS MIDDLE SCHOOL
    3.	GOLDEN GATB  COMMUNITY CENTER
    4.	GOLDEN OATE MIDDLE SCHOOL
    5.	IMMOKALRE HIGH SCHOOL
    6.	IMMOKALER MIDDLE SCHOOL
    7.	LELY HIGH SCHOOL
    8.	NAPLES HIGH SCHOOL
    9.	PINE RIDGE MIDDLE SCHOOL
    LEGEND
    NOTE: FLOOD HEIGHTS
    AT SHORELINE
    'i
    R
    I
    UP TO 8 FEET \
    ABOVE MEAN
    SEA LEVEL(MSL)
    UP TO 10 FEET
    ABOVE MSL

    UP TO 16 FEET
    ABOVE 'MSL
    RED CROSS MANAGED PUBLIC SHELTER LOCATIONS
    I
    II-A-16

    TABLE 7
    COLLIER COUNTY SHELTERS
    Cap
    20
    Address          per

    Cougar Drive

    Golden Gate Blvd., N.

    Golden Gate Pkwy.

    48th Terrace SW

    9th St. & Immokalee Rd.

    N. 9th Street

    Lely Blvd.

    22nd Avenue N.

    Pine Ridge Rd.

    CAPACITY:
    pacity at   Zone
    ) sq. ft. VulnE
    pers_on   abili
    2,500	2

    700	3

    400	3

    1,700	3

    600	Beyont

    1,200	Beyont

    2,500	2

    1,800	3

    800	3

    12,200 persons
    er-
    ity

    d 5

    d 5
    Red Cross Managed Shelter

    Barron Collier High School

    Big Cypress Middle School*

    Golden Gate Community Ctr.

    Golden Gate Middle School

    Immokalee High School

    Immokalee Middle School

    Lely High School

    Naples High School

    Pine Ridge Middle School**

    TOTAL: 9 shelters
    *   Designated shelter for handicapped persons.
    ** Designated shelter for nursing homes.
    I
    I
    I
    1

    I
    I
    I
    3
    TABLE 8
    PUBLIC SHELTER CAPACITY
    EVACU
    IEES             PERCENT MET
    NOVEMBER	JULY     NOVEMBER

    98,124	15.2	12.4

    117,622	7.4	6.1

    158,1'64	<1	<1
    (5.3)	(4.6)

    165,001	1.3	1.1

    167,443	(1	<l1

    shelters in Category 3 storms to
    ST
    CAT
    roRM
    PEGORY	SPACE	JULY

    1	12,200	79,981

    2	7,200	97,491

    3	1,800	135,487
    (7,200)*

    4	1,800	141,681

    5	1,800	143,978

    *The  potential exists for
    remain open.
    T  - A -- 7

    Public  shelters  within  the County are not the  only  means  of
    meeting.evacuee shelter needs.   Regretfully, they seem to be the
    largest.	Other	options for evacuees include "friends," hotels
    and  one's	own	home (refusal to leave).   Of  these,  only  the
    commercial	(hotel) option can be assessed.   In Collier	County,
    there  is	an estimated 6,096 hotel/motel  rooms.   The	greatest
    portion (91.9%) are along the shoreline or are in the category  1I
    flood  zone.   This leaves 495 units for category 1  storms,  226
    units for category 2 storms, 101 units for category 3 storms, and
    41 units for 4/5 category storms. The 495 units (at 100%
    vacancy) would satisfy 1.5% of demand in July and 1.2% of  demand
    in November,  for a category 1 storm.  In Category 2 storms, less
    than 1% of demand would be met, while the greater storms
    eliminate  virtually  all  capacity  'o'f  commercial  space  being
    available.
    I
    In summary, public and commercial shelter space meets this muchI
    of county evacuee needs:

    Storm Category 1 = 16.7% July, 13.6% November
    Storm Category 2 = 8.0% July, 6.4% November
    Storm Category 3 = 5.5% July, 4.7% November
    Categories 4/5   = <1%

    Without  public  or private commercial space  available  evacuees
    have  only  the options of using friends within  the  County,  or
    leaving the County for less affected areas such as areas outside
    of  the  storm's  probable  impact.    The  shelter  capacity	of
    "friends"	is limited.  This capacity diminishes as the ratio	of
    evacuees	to  those  not affected  increases.   This  problem	is
    depicted in Table 9.

    TABLE 9
    POPULATION DISPLACEMENT RATIO

    STORM                     POPULATION
    CATEGORY       DISPLACED	NOT DISPLACED          RATIO
    July	November	July	November	July  November

    1	79,981	98,124	63,997	69,319	1.25:1	1.4:1

    2	97,491	117,622	46,487	49,821	2.1:1	2.4:1

    3	135,487	158,164	8,491	9,279	16:1	18.6:1

    4	141,681	165,001	2,297	2,442	61.6:1 67.'6:1

    5	143,978	167,443        0          0

    It is an assumption that ratios of 1:1 or better  (0.8:1,	0.6:1)
    will  enable  those seeking shelter with friends will find	them.
    Ratios of worse than 1:1 (2:1,  for example),  will diminish that
    likelihood  in proportion to the ratio.   Given that  assumption,
    only 80% of those evacuees from a category 1. storm wishing to
    stay  with friends will be able to do so (80% in July and 70%  in

    II-A-18                                    .3

    November).   Since  13%  of evacuees have  that  desire  (SWFRPC,
    1981),  only 10.4% (July) and 9.2% (November) will be able to  do
    so.   This  worsens  for each stronger category,  with only  6.5%
    (July) and 5.4 (November) for Category 2 storms; for Category 3,
    this becomes 0.8% in July and 0.7% in November;  and for  greater
    storms, it becomes insignificant.

    These percentages added to the shelter populations absorb the
    remainder  of "in county" shelter demand satisfaction.   This  is
    summarized in Table 10.

    TABLE 10
    SHELTER SATISFACTION IN COLLIER COUNTY

    3
    PERCENT MET
    CATEGORY	JULY	NOVEMBER

    1	27.1	22.8
    2	14.5	11.8
    3	6.3	6.1
    4 <1 <1
    5 <1 <1

    If	shelter needs cannot be met within the County,.	they must	be
    met	outside  of the County.   For this reason,  a	knowledge	of
    routes and route capacities becomes important.

    Routes

    Arterial roadways form the backbone of any hurricane evacuation
    effort.   Collier County's roadway system provides relatively few-
    U      options for evacuees coming from the coast.   Those that do exist
    are depicted on Map 6, "Evacuation Routes." Identification of
    routes  is the first step in assessing the roadway  system.	The
    next  step  is assessing roadway capacities.	The capacities	of
    these    roadways   have   been   develope.d	based   on    their-
    characteristics, tied to the assessment methodologies of the
    Highway Capacity Manual, 1985. These capacities are contained in
    Table  11,  and show that the roadways (at the 90/10 split)  vary
    from a high hourly capacity at service level D of 2,410 trips for
    1-75, to a low of 756 trips at the Hendry County line for SR 29.

    An important aspect of any route is its condition.   Many  routes
    along the shore are low lying.   Their-p'ropensity to flood due to
    surge or tidal action causes their reliability to operate as a
    route  to  cease  several hours before  storm  landfall.  .-Map  6
    depicts these possibilities.   In most cases, however, winds, not
    shoreline flooding, will initially make roads unsafe for travel.
    The exception seems to be the Bonita Shores area for 'landfalling
    storms of category 1 or 2 strength.

    Rainfall flooding,  however,  may constitute a greater hazard  to
    evacuation route operation than either early shoreline flooding
    or  early winds.   This is because roadways may flood and  become
    partially  or  totally impassible early in an  evacuation.   Such
    IT--A-19

    TABLE 11
    EVACUATION ROUTE CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
    COLLIER COUNTY
    PER-    MAXIMUM
    CENT NO HRLY. FLOW/
    HIGHWAY	PASSING	FLOW RATE
    TYPE	ZONES	(LOS  D)
    LANE
    # OF	WIDTH
    LANES	(FT.)
    DESIGN
    SPEED
    (MPH)
    TRAFFIC FLOW SPLIT
    50/50  70/30  90/10
    ROUTE
    1-75
    Lee County To SR 84

    US 41
    Lee County to Solana Rd.
    Solana Rd. to SR 84
    SR 84 to Rattlesnake
    Hammock Road
    Rattlesnake Hammock Road
    to SR 951
    SR 951 to SR 29
    SR 29 to Dade County
    4	12	70	Freeway

    4	12	70	Rur.Div.
    6	12	60	Sub.Div.
    4	12	60	Sub.Div.

    4	12	60	Rur.Div.

    2	12	60	--
    2	12	60	--
    2,410

    2,302
    2,801
    1, 886

    2,117
    H
    H
    I

    o
    90
    90
    1,202
    1,. 202
    724
    724
    902
    902
    977
    977
    SR 951
    US 41 to Marco Bridge
    1,151
    958   1,036
    2    -   12
    60
    100
    769
    SR 84
    US 41 to Airport Road
    Airport Road to CR 951
    CR 951 to Broward Co.
    6	11
    2	12
    2	12
    60
    60
    60
    Sub.Div.
    2,661
    1,089.
    1,089-
    80
    80
    726
    726
    904
    904
    980
    980
    SR 29
    Hendry Co. to Immokalee
    Ii,mokalee to SR 84
    SRl 84 to US 41

    SR 82
    Hendry County to SR 29
    2	10	60
    2	12	60
    2	10	60
    80
    80
    80
    840
    1,050
    902

    1,'080
    560
    700
    601

    650
    698
    872
    749

    810
    756
    945
    812

    878
    2
    12      60
    80
    ImmI/~IIIIIIII//Imm

    - -- -- -m-  - m - -m- -- - - m

    TABLE 11 (Continuedl
    EVACUATION ROUTE CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
    COLLIER COUNTY
    PER-
    CENT NO
    HIGHWAY PASSING
    TYPE    ZONES
    MAXIMUM
    HRLY. FLOW/
    FLOW RATE
    (LOS D)

    1,371
    1,057
    914
    LANE
    # OF   WIDTII
    LANES -(FT.)
    DESIGN
    SPEED
    (MPII)
    TRAFFIC
    FLOW SPLIT
    ROUTE
    CR 846
    CR 901 to I-75
    I-75 to SR 29
    SR 29 to Hendry County
    50/50  70/30  90/10
    2	12	60	Rur.Div.
    2	12	60	Rur.Div.
    2	9	50	Rur.Div.
    90
    90
    90
    770
    706
    960    1,040
    880      954
    CR 858
    CR 846 to Hendry County
    2      12       60     Rur.Div.
    962
    80
    1,183
    713
    888
    CR 891
    CR 846 to Green Blvd.

    CR 951
    Green Blvd. to Radio Rd.
    Radio Rd. to US 41
    H
    H
    I

    i-
    a
    2      12      60    Rur.Div.
    90

    100
    1, 109

    1,924
    1,136
    740

    757
    921
    998
    4
    2
    12
    12
    60	Sub.Div.
    60	Rur.Div.
    944   1,022
    CR 864
    Rattlesnake Ilammock Rd.

    Country Barn Road
    1, 291

    1,440
    777

    766
    2	12	60	Rur.Div.

    2	12	60	Rur.Div.
    90

    90
    969	1,049

    954	1,034
    CR 856 (Radio Road)

    CR 31 (Airport Road)
    SR 846 to US 41
    4	12	60	Sub.Div.

    4	12	60	Sub.Div.
    90
    1,064
    640
    799
    865
    1,924
    CR 896 (Pine Ridge. Road)
    US 41 to CR 951
    4       12
    60   Sub.Div.
    1,912

    1,913
    CR 886 (Golden Gate Pkwy.)
    US 41 to CR 951
    V
    1
    4 l1
    60   Sub.Div.

    TABLE 11 (Continuedl
    EVACUATION ROUTE CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
    COLLIER COUNTY
    PER-
    CENT NO
    HIGIIWAY PASSING
    TYPE     ZONES
    MAXIMUM
    HRLY. FLOW/
    FLOW RATE
    (LOS D)
    LANE
    # OF	WIDTHI
    LANES	(FT.)
    DESIGN
    SPEED
    (MPH)
    TRAFFIC FLOW SPLIT
    50/50  70/30  90/10
    ROUTE
    CR 851 (Goodlette Rd.)
    CR 896 to US 41

    Santa Barbara Blvd.
    Green Blvd. to SR 84

    CR 901
    Lee County to CR 846
    4	12

    4	12

    2	10
    60	Sub.Div.

    60	Sub.Div.

    60	Rur.Div.

    50	Rur.Div.

    50	Rur.Div.
    1,924

    1,964
    865

    610

    805
    H
    H
    90

    80

    90
    1,064

    678

    895
    640

    452

    597
    799

    563

    743
    CR 839
    (Birdon Rd.) SR 84 to
    US 41
    2
    9
    CR 850
    Lee County to SR 82
    2       10
    I
    m m m m m m      m m m _  m m m m _ m m

    C   0C

    X    |   ~ -C856                   SR84
     :	County
    0.	Boarn Rd
    864-

    SR 51

    : Q ! 2  3 4 MILES
    SWFRPC 87-RNC

    MAP 6
    COLLIER COUNTY
    EVACUATION' ROUTES
    II-A-23

    !

    areas have been documented for different storms and are  depicted
    on  Map .7.   These  are  areas that must be  passed  before  the
    presupposed onset of heavy rains, which is eight hours before eye
    landfall-   This is relevant for Category 1 storms for most areas
    of  Collier County and for fewer areas for Category 2 or  greater
    storms.

    Clearance Times                                                               1

    There  are  several factors taken into account when   calculating
    community clearance time.  The first is the nature of the threat.
    Although there are no assurances that t-he, County cannot be struck
    by  Category 4 and 5 storms,  the probabi'lities of this are  low.
    The County does, however, lie subject-to Storms of Category 1,-2,
    and  3  strength in decreasing probability.   With each storm  of
    increasing  strength,  the  number of persons and  vehicles  also
    increases.

    Other  factors contributing to clearance time are the	number  of
    vehicles  evacuating  and  the  capacity  of  roadways	to  carry
    evacuees. This translates into a number of hours it will take to
    move persons past any given point.

    The  final factors include the number and distance of	"stopping"
    opportunities  offered  evacuees,   and  the  distance	to  these
    opportunities.    If  stopping opportunities needed are only   ten
    miles inland, the time is much less for an evacuation than if
    they are 100 miles distant.

    These   factors  compose  the  evacuation  time.    For	certain
    communities  within the County,  times are less than for	others.
    This  variation is because pre-landfall flood conditions are  not
    as  bad,	shelter	locations  are  closer,	and	better  quality
    evacuation	routes	are  available.   Table	12	summarizes  pre-
    landfall flood conditions,  Table 13 summarizes shelter distances
    and options,  and Table 14 summarizes the time it takes to  clear-
    the  most  restrictive point on the route for each community  for
    each of the slow, intermediate, and quick responses.

    I
    !
    !
    !
    !

    II-A--24

    C)
    r
    t-
    -
    MAP 7
    COLLIER COUNTY
    ROUTES SUBJECT TO RAINFALL
    FLOODING
    II-A-25

    I
    I
    TABLE 12
    PRE-LANDFALL FLOOD CONDITIONS
    I
    TIME TO
    COASTAL FLOOD    RAINFALL
    WIND
    COMMUNITY
    CATEGORY
    Everglades

    Goodland

    HIenderson Crk.

    Rookery Bay

    Naples Beach

    East Naples

    Fakahatchee

    North Naples
    Golden Gate
    1
    2
    3
    1
    2
    3
    1
    2
    3
    1
    2
    3
    1
    2
    3
    2
    3
    2
    3
    3
    3
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    5.5
    6.5
    8.5
    6.5
    8
    10.5
    6.5
    8
    10.5
    5
    7
    9.5
    5.5
    7
    9.5
    7
    9. 5
    7
    9
    9
    9
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    0.5
    1.5
    1.5
    2.5
    5.0
    1.5
    2.5
    5.0

    1.5
    3.0
    7
    7.5
    9.0
    1.2
    3.0
    1.5
    3.0
    2.5
    1.5
    I
    TABLE 13
    SHELTER DESIGNATIONS AND OPTIONS
    CATEGORY
    ZONE
    PUBLIC SHELTERS
    NAME
    ESTIMATED
    TRAVEL TIME
    1     Everglades        Immokalee Middle School
    Immokalee High School
    1     Goodland           Immokalee Middle School
    Immokalee High School
    1     Elenderson         Lely High School
    Creek
    1     So. Naples         Lely High School
    Pine Ridge Middle
    Golden Gate Middle
    Barron ColLier Hligh School
    Golden Gate Comm.
    Naples High School
    r1    Naples Beaches    Lely High School
    Pine Ridge Middle
    Golden Gate Middle
    Barron Collier High School
    Golden Gate Comm.
    Naples High
    1     Mobile Homes (2-5)
    1 hr.

    1 hr.

    .25 hr.

    .5 hr.

    .25 hr.

    .5 hr.
    I
    I
    I
    II-A-26

    TABLE 13 (Continuedi
    SHELTER DESIGNATIONS AND OPTIONS

    CATEGORY      ZONE             PUBLIC SHELTERS	ESTIMIATED
    NAME	TRAVEL TIME

    2     All I Zones        Immokalee Middle School
    Immokalee High School
    Pine Ridge Middle
    Golden Ca te Middle
    Golden Gate Comm.
    Naples High
    2     East  Naples       Immokalee Middle School         .25 hr.
    Immokalee High School
    Pine Ridge Middle
    Golden Gate Middle
    Golden Gate Comm.
    Naples High
    Fakahatchee        Immokalee Schools               .5 hr.
    3     AI.l Ii and 2 Zones Only Immokalee
    Schools*
    North Naples       Only Immokalee
    Schools
    Golden Gate        Only immokalee
    Schools

    *Possibility exists that Golden Gate Schools would only
    flood from extremely bad Category 3 storm conditions.
    However,   careful   examination  of  past  heavy   rainfall
    conditions on the areas of these shelters, particularly the
    functioning of the canals, should be taken into effect.

    As can be seen from this table, some routes end up being ultimate
    constricting points for more than I zone.   That being the  case,
    it may be expected that these times will become cumulative. This-*
    creates a "greatest time to clear" for the county as a whol-e.-
    Table 15 depicts the "greatest time to clear" calculation for
    each category storm.
    11-A-27

    TABLE 14
    TIME TO CLEAR

    JULY
    INTER-
    NOVEMBER
    INTER-
    CATEGOf

    1

    1

    1

    1

    H
    H	1

    1	2

    2

    3

    3*
    RY
    ZONE
    RESTRICTING
    TO COUNTY
    LINE

    1.0

    1.0

    1.0

    0.6

    0.5

    0.5

    0.6

    0.5

    0.5
    POINT

    29

    29

    951

    41

    896 8

    951 &

    29

    846 &

    951
    SLOW  MEDIATE	QUICK	SLOW	MEDIATE	QUICK

    0.6	0.5	0.5	0.8	0.6	0.6

    (0.7	0.6	0.5	1.0	0.8	0.7

    10.0	8.0	7.4	12.5	10.0	9.3

    5.0	5.0	5.0	5.9	5.9	5.9

    6.3	6.0	5.7	7.2	6.7	6.2

    3.0	2.8	2.6	3.4	3.2	3.0

    1.2	1.0	0.8	1.8	1.4	1.3

    6.0	5.6	5.2	6.7	6.2	5.8

    2.3	1.8	1.7	2.4	1.9	1.7
    Everglades

    Goodland

    Henderson Crk.

    South Naples

    Naples Beaches

    East Naples

    Fakahatchee

    North Naples

    Golden Gate
    SR

    SR

    SR

    US

    CR

    CR

    SR

    CR

    CR
    , CR 846

    & CR 31

    K CR 896
    *Only extreme Category 3 conditions would induce flooding in this zone

    .   .   .   .                                       .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
     II mm I   I  I - _ _       m     _    mm

    TABLE 15
    ULTIMATE CONSTRICTING ROUTE

    TIME
    CATEGORY  CONSTRICTING --	JULY	NOVEMBER
    ROUTE	INTER-	INTER-
    SLOW	MEDIATE	QUICK	SLOW	MEDIATE	QUICK

    1	SR 951	10.0	8.0	7.4	12.5	10.0	9.3

    2	CR 951	13.0	10.8	10.0	15.9	13.2	12.3

    3	CR 951*	13.0	10.8	10.0	15.9	13.2	12.3

    *Reflects traffic dispersion to 1-75

    Clearly, route constriction becomes a concern when it is unevenly
    distributed between different parts of the County.   The relative
    isolation of the shoreline south of Naples and the limited routes
    south of SR 84 limits evacuation capacity causing the large
    times. The possibility exists that increased traffic control can
    better  distribute loadings.   If that is the case,  the ultimate
    constricting points move to the sum of the routes exiting the
    County.   Table  16  depicts  the times  that  may  occur,  given
    different routing scenarios.

    The last factor to be incorporated into calculating the County
    clearance	time  is	the	response of potential  evacuees  to  an
    evacuation	order.	The	original  1981-82  Regional  Hurricane
    Evacuation Plan discussed this topic on page 125, and concluded
    that seven hours would be the minimum time needed to clear a
    zone,  because some evacuees would dawdle more than others.  More
    recent history indicates that sudden or dramatic changes in
    hurricanes can heighten the evacuees response into a "quick"
    evacuation, limited basically by road capacity.  Consequently, in
    evaluating   the   final   criteria  that  determines   a   slow,---
    intermediate, or quick evacuation, both slow and intermediate-
    zones will have a minimum response time of seven  hours;	"quick"
    times, however, will be limited only by roadway capacity.	All of
    these factors combine into creating a countywide clearance time.
    This time will vary depending upon the routes available for out
    of  county evacuation,  the time of season,  and whether it is  a
    slow,  intermediate,  or quick response.  Table 17 summarizes the
    contribution  to the greatest clearance time for the  County  for
    each category storm.

    The  clearance  time  for the County as a whole  for	Category  3
    storms  will  increase  if out-of-county  evacuation	is  limited
    solely to 1-75 (north or east) and SR 29 (north).  If-more routes
    are provided,  the time may lessen.  This, of course depends upon
    the impact of the other evacuating counties.
    II-A-29

    TABLE 16
    COUNTY EXITING ROUTES
    % OF
    TOTAL COUNTY
    VEHICLES
    TIMES
    TOTAL
    CATEGORY  VEIIICLES
    LEAVING CO.
    COMBINED CAPACITIES
    JULY
    NOVEMBER
    SLOW INTER- QUICK
    MEDIATE
    ROUTES
    SLOW INTER-
    IED IATE
    QUICK
    SLOW INTER-
    MEDIATE
    QUlICK
    l(a)    26,729(J)
    34,721(N)
    72.9
    77.2
    1-75 (N & E)
    AND SR 29
    3,696  4,012   4,146
    7.2   6.7
    6.4
    9.4   8.7
    8.4
    2(a)    39,066(J)
    47,550(N)
    85.5
    88.2
    same as l(a)
    10.5   9.7
    9.4    12.9  11.9    11.5
    (b)
    I-75
    AND
    AND
    (N & E)
    SR 29,
    US 41(N)
    5,998 6,314
    6,448
    6.5   6.2
    6.1
    8.0   7.5
    7.4
    3(a)
    (b)
    (c)
    58,192(J)
    68,072(N)
    93.7
    93.9
    same as 1(a)
    same as 2(b)
    1-75 (N and E)
    AND SR 29,
    AND US 41
    (N AND E)
    15.7
    9.7
    8.6
    14.5
    9.2
    8.1
    -14.0
    9.0'
    7,8
    18.4
    11.3
    10.1
    17.0
    10.8
    9.4
    16.4
    10.6
    9.2
    6,722  7,216   7,425
    /mII/II/IIIBllImm
    II//

    m- -- - -     - - - - - - - -  -m

    TABLE 17
    TOTAL EVACUATION TIME
    CLEARANCE TIME
    INTERMIDIATE
    J      N         J
    TOTAL EVACUATION
    SLOW    INTERMEDIATE
    N     J     N      J      N
    TIME
    QUICK
    J
    SLOW
    N
    QUICK
    CATEGORY DESTINATION(1)
    WEATHER(2)
    N
    1

    2
    L.0

    1.0
    8

    8
    10.0   12.5
    8.0   10.0
    7.4
    16.4 18.3

    19.0 21.3
    9.3  19.0  21.5   17.0  19.0
    13.0   15.9    10.8   13.2
    10.0    12.3  22.0  24.9   19.8  22.2
    3
    1.0
    10.5
    13.0    15.9
    (15.7) (18.4)
    10.8   13.2
    (14.5) (17.0)
    10.0	12.3
    (14.0)
    	(16.4
    )
    24.5 27.4
    21.5 23.8
    (23.0)(25.4)
    22.3 24.7
    (24.7)(.27.4) (23.5)(26.0)
    (1) From Table 13 or 14, whichever is greater
    H
    H

    I
    (2)
    From Table 12
    Numbers  in parenthesis reflect "County Exiting Time" restrictions if
    The weather restricting factor is rainfall in such an event.
    too few roadways can be accessed.

    !

    PART II - 1991 FORECASTS

    Part   of	hurricane  preparedness  involves  understanding   and
    evaluating	the  growth that may be expected in  the  forthcoming
    years.   This element discusses short ranged growth (4 years) the
    area  may  undergo,  and the facilities that are expected  to  be
    added to serve it.

     The  growth	predicted follows a single  straight-lined  forecast
    technique.	Applied  uniformly,	increases  by	category	and
    community  for  housing,  persons,	and	vehicles	for  1991	are
    depicted in Tables 18, 19, and 20.	.

    *   Table 18 forecasts a total of 95,225 dwelling units for 1991.
    [
    Table  19  forecasts  a total of 161,442  persons  in  July;  and
    187,871 in November.

    Table 20 forecasts a total of 74,002 vehicles in July; and 86,108
    in November.

    TABLE 19
    COLLIER COUNTY POPULATION ESTIMATES FOR 1991

    (Mobile	(Mobile
    Zone     Name                July	Home/TT)   November	Home/TT)

    1    Everglades City        896	(	193)	1,144	(  411)
    Goodland	1,051	(	254)	1,419	( 539)
    Hfenderson Creek	18,792	(1,621)	23,535	(3,441)
    South Naples	23,013	(1,391)	27,127	(2,954)
    I
    Naples Beaches	41,533	(	829)	47,417	(1,759)

    * 2    East Naples	19,421.	(	840)	22,517	(1,7841)
    Fakahatchee	1,740	(	674)	2,576	(1,433)

    3    North Naples	39,564	(1,118)	43,674	(2,373)
    Golden Gate	4,273	(   88)	4,374	(  186)

    4	Corkscrew	8,360	(1,511)	10,880	(3,209)

    5	Northeast County	2,316	(	147)	2,612	(	312)
    Big Cypress            482	(	74)         596	(	156)

    � .    TOTAL           161,442	( 8,740)   187,871	(18,557)
    I
    I
    ~~~~~~~~~~!
    I

    II-A-32

    TABLE 18
    COLLIER COUNTY - HOUSING ESTIMATE FOR 1991
    (Based on projected housing units of 95,225)
    Storm	Residential	Mobile Home/	Multi-	Hotel-
    Category        Zone	Single-Family	Rec. Vehicle	Family   Duplex	Motel	Total

    1       Everglades City      264                248           17          9       33	570
    Chokoloskee
    � 1        Goodland           139               325           50         49      221        785
    Ten Thousand Islands
    1	IIenderson Creek	2,487	2,078	6,077	40	2,296	12,978
    *  1	South Naples	4,416	1,784	6,576	688	365	13,829
    Rookery Bay
    1        Naples Beaches	8,347	1,063	10,707	.811	3,370	24,298

    TOTAL	ZONE 1	15,653	5,498	23,427	1,598	6,284	52,460

    2	East Naples	3,456	1,077	5,556	'990	302	11,380
    .. 2	Fakahatchee	327	865	209          0	0	1,400
    Copeland

    TOTAL          ZONE 2	3,782	1,942	5,765        990	302     12,781
    TOTALS	ZONES 1 & 2	19,435	7,440	29,192	'2,587	6,586..:.n 65,241

    3	North Naples	10,175	1,433	7,565	1,497	140     20,810
    Golden Gate
    3	Golden Gate      1,739               112            8          0        0      1,859
     '.	Sunnyland

    TOTAL	ZONE 3	11,915	1,545	7,572	1,497      140	22,669
    TOTALS	ZONES 1 - 3	31,350	8,985	36,765	4,084    6,726	87,910

    4	Corkscrew/	1,451	1,938	2,159        148       67	5,763
    '.	Immokalee

    TO TAL	ZONE 4	1,451	1,938	2,159        148       67	5,763
    TOTALS	ZONES 1 - 4	32,801	10,923	38,923     4,232    6,794	93,672

    , 5	Northeast County	63f	188	316	68	46	1,252
    5	Big Cypress	122	94	84	0	0	301
    .T.OTAL	ZONE 5	755,	283	401	68	46	1,553
    TOTALS	ZONES .1 - 5    33,556            11,205        39,324     4,301    6,840	95,225

    -'.
    H
    H
    I
    I
    w
    w
    t3~
    L.J

    I
    I
    I
    TABLE 20
    MOTOR VEHICLE ESTIMATES FOR 1991

    (Mobile	(Mobile
    Zone	Name              July	Rome/TT)   November	Home/TT)

    E	verglades City	419	(	89)	525	(	188)
    Goodland	481	(	117)	650	(	247)
    Henderson Creek	8,614	(	743)	10,788	( 1,578)
    South Naples	10,548	(	637)	12,434	(1,354)
    Naples Beaches	19,036	(	280)	21,733	(  807)
    I
    8,901  (
    799 (
    (	818)
    (	656)
    2    East Naples
    Fakahatchee
    385)
    310)
    10,320
    1,180

    I
    I
    I
    3    North Naples
    Golden Gate
    18,134
    1,958
    (	513)
    (	40)
    20,016	( 1,087)
    2,005	(    85)
    4	Corkscrew	3,831	(	692)	4,986	( 1,471)

    5	Northeast County	1,061	(	67)	1,197	(	144)
    Big Cypress            221	(	34)        273	(	72)

    TOTALT          74,002	(4,007)    86,108	(8,507)
    The   additional  facilities  expected  can  be  categorized   as
    "shelters" and "routes." Regretfully, future shelter site and
    capacity information has not yet been exactly determined.   Route
    improvements, however, are better known.

    i
    I

    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    There	are	three new schools forecast for	Collier	County,  one
    middle	and	two elementary schools.   In	addition,	Pine  Ridge
    Middle is expected to undergo an expansion as well as is the
    Exceptional Student Education Program.

    Currently, the-County is only designating middle or high schools_.
    as shelters.   This policy, if continued, would only have the new
    middle school and the Pine Ridge additions as new shelter space.
    Neither proposed facility has been assessed for its capacity.
    However, for short term purposes, the new Middle School will be
    assessed to have 800 spaces, and the Pine Ridge expansion will
    add  400	spaces.	The new middle school is assumed to be	in  a
    Category	2  zone	area south of SR 84.   These 1200 -new	spaces
    increase the County shelter capacity by 10% during a period when
    the County is expected to increase demand by 12.2%.

    Route   improvements  for  the  next  five-year  period  indicate
    substantial improvements will be made to routes exiting the
    Category 1 zone.   Using the 1988-1992 TIP of the	Naples/Collier
    County  Metropolitan  Planning  Organization  as	a  guide,   the
    following significant improvements are forecasted:

    I
    (a)	Adding two lanes to SR 90 (Tamiami Trail) for 2.1 miles  '
    (-b)	Adding two::ianes to SR '951 for 6.6 mi-le's'(Mar: o''.Is'And:'"i.::'' t:'::-"' .....
    41) (unfunded)
    II-A-34

    I

    (c)  Improving  1-75  (Alligator Alley) for 29.2  miles  eastward
    toward Broward County
    (d) Adding two laes to CR 951 for 6.2 miles
    (e)  Extending  Vanderbilt Beach Road as a 4--lane four to CR  951
    I|   ~(two lanes) for 2.9 miles
    (f)  Adding two lanes to Airport Pulling Road for 2.4 miles
    (g) Extending Livingston Road as a 4-lane road for 6.2 miles
    I    (h)	Adding two lanes to Immokalee Road (C 846) for 3.5 miles
    (i)	Adding two lanes to Pine Ridge Road for 2 miles

    Even though the exact capacities of these new improvements cannot
     be calculated at this time,  an estimate can be made.   Table  21
    provides a revision of the previously provided Table 11 to
    represent 1991 conditions.

    TABLE 21
    REVISED CAPACITIES
    NEW
    ROUTE                                   CAPACITY
    OLD
    CAPACITY
     US 41 from 5 Ave. S to CR 31
    SR 951 from Marco to US 41*
    1-75 from current segment to
    Broward Co.
    CR 987 from US 41 to CR 864
    Vanderbilt Beach Road from
    existing to CR 951
     CR 31 from UIS 41 to Golden Gate
    Livingston from CR 846 to
    Imperial
    m Immokalee from US 41 to 1-75
    Pine Ridge Road from US 41 to
    _ -CR 31
    2,801
    1,886

    2,410
    1,886

    865 (quick)
    2,801

    1,886
    1, 886

    2,801
    1,886
    1,036 (quick)

    980 (quick)
    1,022 (quick)

    0
    1,924

    0
    1,040 (quick)

    1,921
    *           tCurrently-listed as an "unfunded" project                    _

    Assuming  that  these  improvements are  in  place,  new  shelter
    m
    satisfaction  capacities  (Table 10),	time to clear (Table	14),
    exiting route assessments (Table ].6),	and total evacuation	time
     calculations (Table ]17) can be made.

    Shelter capacities do not improve with the facilities projected
    because  growth is outstripping the capacity  added.	Since	the
    methodology  used  was a single straight-line process,	the	only
    ractors changfing were the population (up 12.2%) and shelter space
    (up 9.8 A).   As a result,  shelter satisfaction within the County
    [     will demonstrate a decline.  Table 22 depicts this decline.
    I
    II-A-35

    TABLE 22
    SHELTER SATISFACTIONL 1991

    PERCENT MET
    CATEGORY	JULY      NOVEMBER

    1	26.8	21.4
    2	14.2	11.9
    3	6,4	5.5
    4	<1	<1
    5	(1       ,<1

    This  decline  can	only worsen evacuation  and  clearance	times
    unless	comparable	out--of-county	route, improvements  are	made.
    Using	the  improvements listed,	there  are  route  improvements
    forecast	that improve in-county movement capacities.   The	most
    effective	improvements  are  SR  951 to  US  41  (unfunded)  and
    Immokalee Road. Table 23 depicts these changes.
    I
    TABLE 23
    REVISED TIME TO CLEAR 1991

    JULY
    I
    I
    I
    NOVEMBER
    INTER-
    CATEGOR

    1

    1

    1

    1

    1

    2

    2

    3
    3
    R
    Y
    ZONE   RESTRICTING
    POINT
    INTER-
    SLOW MEDIATE QUICK SLOW MEDIATE QUICK

    0.7	0.6	0.6	0.9	0.7	0.6

    0.8	0.7	0.6	1.1	0.9	0.8

    4.6	4.6	4.6	5.7	5.7	5.7

    5.6	5.6	5.6	6.6	6.6
    	_6.6

    5.0	5.0	5.0	5.7	5.7	5.7

    2.3	2.3	2.3	2,7	2.7	2.7

    1.3	1.1	0.9	2.0	1.5	1.4

    4.8	4.8	4.8	5.3	5.3	5.3

    1.0	1.0	1.0	1.1	1.1	1.1
    SR 29

    SR 29

    SR 951

    US 41

    CR 896 & CR 846

    CR 951 & CR 31

    SR 29

    CR 846 & CR 896

    CR 951
    Everglades

    Goodland

    Henderson Crk.

    South Naples

    Naples Beaches

    East Naples

    Fakahatchee

    North Naples

    Golden Gate
    S = Slow
    I = Intermediate
    Q = Quick
    I
    I
    I
    I
    II-A-36

    Regretfully, none of the out-of-county routes have improvements
    slated, with the exception of 1-75 (east). Consequently, traffic
    growth combined with a reduced ability to provide shelter means
    increased out of county times.  This is depicted in Table 24.

    The   improvement	to	critical  coastal	routes  improves   the
    evacuation  times	of	coastal  zones.	Consequently,  behavior
    3  response time (assumed 7 hours) or county exiting route times may
    become the constraining time factor.  This is shown in Table 25.

    Depending  upon the number and capacity, of county exiting  routes
    ava.ilable, either these routes or behavioral response will be the
    constraint for category I or 2 storms. However,	for category 3
    storms,  the  constraining  factor  wi''l be  the	coastal  rout'es
    capacities in the county's highly developed western  shore,  west
    of 1-75.
    I-
    !
    !
    m
    !
    !
    !
    !
    I

    *                          11~~~~~~~~I--A-37

    TABLE 24
    COUNTY EXITING ROUTES 1991
    TOTAL
    CATEGORY  VEHICLES
    LEAVING CO.
    % OF
    TOTAL COUNTY
    VEIIICLES
    TIMES
    ROUTES
    COMBINED CAPACITIES
    SLOW  INTER-  QUICK
    MEDIATE
    JULY
    SLOW INTER-
    MEDIATE
    NOVEMBER
    SLOW  INTER-  QUICK
    MEDIATE
    QUICK
    l(a)    30,113(J)
    39,664(N)
    73.2
    78.6
    1-75 (N & E)
    AND SR 29
    5,380 5,518
    5,576
    5.6   5.5
    5.4
    7.4   7.2
    7.1
    2(a)    49,923(J)
    53,290(N)
    85.6
    88.1
    same as l(a)
    8.0	7.8

    7,682  7,820   7,878    5.6	5.5
    7.7
    9.9   9.7
    9.6

    6.7

    13.8
    9.7
    8.7
    (b)
    (N & E)
    SR 29,
    US 41(N)
    1-75
    AND
    AND
    5.4   .. 6.9   6.8
    H
    H
    I

    1>
    I
    Go
    CO
    3(a)
    (b)
    (c)
    65,223(J)
    76,864(N)
    93.6
    94.5
    same as l(a)
    same as 2(b)
    1-75 (N and E)
    AND SR 29,
    AND US 41
    (N AND E)
    12.1
    8.5
    7.8
    11.8
    8.4
    7.5
    11.7
    8.3
    7.3
    14.3
    10.0
    9.1
    13.9
    9.8
    8.8
    8,406
    8,714   8,885
    ImMIIMIII/IIIImIIm

    -- - m - m  - ------ m - - m -

    TABLE 25
    TOTAL EVACUATION TIME
    CONS TRA IN-
    -
    ING
    WEATIER   ,ALT*   FACTOR
    CLEARANCE TIME
    INTER-
    SLOW    MEDIATE    QUICK
    TOTAL-EVACUATION TIME
    INTER-
    SLOW    MEDIATE      QUICK
    SEASON  DESTINATION
    CATEGORY

    2
    1.0
    1.0

    1.0

    1.0
    16.6
    16.2

    16.8
    16.0
    18.7
    16.0
    J
    N

    J
    J
    N
    N
    8
    8

    8

    8
    A
    A

    A
    B
    A
    B
    B
    E

    E
    B
    E
    B
    7.0
    7.4

    8.0
    7.0
    9.9
    7.0
    7.0
    7.2

    7.8
    7.0
    9.7
    7.0
    7.0
    7.1

    7.7
    7.0
    9.6
    7.0
    16.0
    16.4

    17.0
    16.0
    18.9
    1].6
    .0
    16.0
    16.1

    16.7
    16.0
    18.6
    16.0
    H
    H
    I

    kD
    3
    J
    J
    N
    N
    1.0

    1.0

    N = November
    10.5

    10.5
    12.1
    9.8
    14.3
    9.8
    11.8
    9.8
    13.9
    9.8
    11.7
    9.8
    13.8
    9.8
    23.6
    21.3
    25.8
    21.3
    23.3
    21.3
    25.4
    21.3
    23.2
    21.3
    25.3
    21.3
    A
    B
    A
    B/C
    E
    Z
    E
    Z
    J = July
    B = Behavior
    Z = Zone Volume and Route Constraint
    E = Exiting Route;
    * From Table 24
    Dependingf uponI the number  n(cl capacity of county exiting routes available,
    ei ther
    these routes or behavorial. response wil.] be the constraint for category 1 or 2
    storms.  tlowever,  for  catlegory  3 stormls,  the constra:ining fac-tor will be  the
    coastal routes capacities in the county's highly developed western shore,  west of
    1-75.

    APPENDIX 1
    LANDFALLING
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 1
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    STJSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    TOTAL
    DURATION
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HOURS
    -        GRID
    STORM
    POINTS

    Chokoloskee Island
    I   Carnestown
    Royal Palm
    Goodland
    Marco Island
    I   Marco Island
    Bridge
    Isle of Capri
    Naples Manor
    Collier County EOC
    Naples
    Pine Ridge

    Bonita Shores

    LANDFALLING
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(1)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    14.5
    13
    11.5
    15
    13.5

    4.5

    8
    (15
    (25
    (20
    (20
    (10
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    (30
    (20
    (15
    (15
    (45
    (10
    (10
    (10
    (5
    (5
    (0
    (0
    (35
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    NS)
    2.5
    -1
    -1.5
    2
    1.5

    1.5

    7
    4.5
    5.5
    6
    6.5
    6.5
    6.5
    6.5
    5.5
    6.
    5.5
    5.5
    5
    5.5
    8
    8
    8.5
    8.5
    10
    9
    9
    8.5
    8.5
    8.5
    9
    8.5
    7
    (25 NS)

    (70 NS)
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 2
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GAI,E
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    TOTAL
    DURATION
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HOURS
    GRID
    STORMI
    POINTS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(l)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    -   Chokoloskee Island
    Carnestown
    Royal Palm
    I Goodland
    Marco Island
    Marco Island Bridge
    Isle of Capri
    Naples Manor
    Collier County EOC
    Naples            --
    P Iine Ridge
    Naples Park
    *   Bonita Shores
    3
    .5
    .5
    3
    2.5
    2
    3
    1
    1.5

    .5

    7.5
    (15 SS)
    (25 SS)
    (20 SS)
    (10 SS)
    (10 SS)
    (10 SS)
    (30 NS)
    (10 SS)
    ( 5 SS)

    (10 NS)

    (60 NS)
    15
    13.5
    13.5
    15
    14.5
    14
    6.5
    13
    13.5
    7
    6.5
    7
    7.5
    8
    7.5
    7.5
    7
    7
    7
    6.5
    7
    6.5
    (25
    (2O
    0
    (15
    (15
    (10
    (10
    (10
    (10
    (10
    (10
    ( 0
    (40
    (25
    SS.
    )
    Ssj
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    S)
    NS)
    NS)
    10.5
    10
    10.5
    10.5
    10.5
    10.5
    10.5
    10.5
    1.0.5
    11-
    10.5
    9
    10
    1
    10

    I
    APPENDIX 1
    LANDFALLING
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 3
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)

    9.5
    8.5
    9
    9.5
    10.5
    10
    10
    9.5
    9.5
    9.5
    9
    9
    9
    TO
    DURA
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HOURS

    (10 SS)	133
    (20 SS)	13.5
    (10 SS)	13.
    (10 SS)	14 1
    (30 NS)	12.5
    (30 NS)	12
    (30 NS)	12.
    (35 NS)	11.
    (35 NS)	12.5
    (35 NS)	12.
    (25 NS)	13.1
    (35 NS)	12.5
    (40 NS)	13
    1
    3
    I
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(1)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    Chokoloskee Island
    Carnestown
    Royal Palm
    Goodland
    Marco Island
    Marco Island Bridge
    Isle of Capri
    .Naples Manor
    Collier County EOC
    Naples
    Pine Ridge
    Naples Park
    Bonita Shores
    4
    1.5
    2
    4
    5
    4
    5
    2.5
    3
    1
    2.5
    1.5
    9
    (10
    (20
    (15
    (10
    (35
    (40
    (45
    (25
    (40
    (0
    (30
    (25
    (75
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    S)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    ;16
    14.5
    14
    16
    15
    14
    9
    13.5
    13
    13
    4
    3
    13
    LANDFALLING
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 4
    I
    TOTAL
    DURAU'
    STORM	INf
    TRACK	HOURS

    (10 SS)	15
    (20 SS)	15
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS

    Chokoloskee Island
    Carnestown
    Royal Palm
    Goodland
    Marco Island
    Marco Island Bridge
    :Isle of Capri
    Naples Manor
    Collier County EOC
    :Naples
    Pine Ridge
    Naples Park
    ,Bonita Shlores
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(1)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    4.5
    2.5
    2.5
    5.5
    6.5
    5
    6.5
    4
    4.5
    2.5
    3.5
    3
    9.5
    (25
    (15
    (15
    (40
    (50
    (40
    (70
    (40
    (50
    (25
    (35
    (35
    (75
    NS)
    SS)
    SS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    15.5
    14.5
    14.5
    16.5
    16.5
    16
    9.5
    15
    14.5
    13.5
    5.5
    4.5
    14
    11
    10
    11
    11.5
    12
    11.5
    11.5
    11
    11.5
    11.5
    11
    10.5
    10.5
    (35
    (35
    (40
    (25
    (35
    (25
    (50
    (50
    (50
    (35
    (45
    S)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    14
    14 !
    14
    15
    14.
    14.
    14
    14
    14 I
    15
    14.5
    !
    I
    I
    I
    2

    APPENDIX 1
    LANDFALLING
    PRE-EYE LAND)FALL  AZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 5
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)

    10.5
    10.5
    10
    10.5
    11
    10.5
    10.5
    10
    10.5
    10.5
    10
    10
    9.5
    TOTAL
    DURATION
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HOURS
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(1)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    (5
    (15
    (10
    (35
    (35
    (40
    (60
    (45
    (30
    (0
    (45
    (35
    (75
    16
    14
     14.5
    15.5
    16.5
    14.5
    7
    9.5
    14.5
    14
    2.5
    2
    13
    I Chokoloskee Island
    Carnestown
    :Royal Palm
    Goodland
    Marco Island
    . Marco Island Bridge
    Isle of Capri
     Naples Manor
    Collier County EOCG
     Naples
     Pine Ridge
    Naples Park
    Bonita Shores
    4
    2
    2.5
    4.5
    5.5
    4.5
    5.5
    3
    4.5
    2
    3
    2
    9
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    S)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    (20
    (10
    (35
    (35
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (25
    (45
    (45
    (35
    (45
    (35
    SS)
    SS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    13.5
    13.5
    11
    11
    12.5
    12
    12.5
    13
    11.5
    11.5
    13
    12.5
    13
    PARALLEL
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 1
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    TOTAL
    DURATION
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HOURS
    GRID
    3
    STOrM
    POINTS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(1)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOUJRS
    Chokoloskee Island
    Carnestown
    Royal Palm
    :Goodland
     Marco Island
    .Marco Island Bridge
    !Isle of Capri
    I   Naples Manor
    Collier County EOC
    Naples
    Pine Ridge
     Naples Park
    Bonita Shores
    3.5
    1
    -5.5
    2.5
    1.5

    1

    .5
    ( 0	S)
    ( 0	S)
    ( 0	s)
    ( 0	S)
    ( 0	S)

    ( 0	S)

    (30 wS)
    15.5
    13
    6.5
    14.5
    13.5
    10
    10
    8.5
    8.5
    8.5
    8
    8.5
    8
    7
    7
    6.5
    6
    6
    (15 ES)
    (15 ES)
    (-o -6)
    ( 0 S)
    (15 WS)
    (15 WS)
    ( 0 S)
    ( 0 S)
    (15 ES)
    ( 0 S)
    (15 WS)
    (15 WS)
    ( 0 S)
    9.5
    10
    9.5
    9.5
    9.5
    9
    9.5
    9
    8
    9
    8.5
    6
    9
    3.5
    5
    7

    APPENDIX 1
    PARALLEL�
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 2
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    TOTAL
    DURAT
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HOURS
    HOIURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(1)
    TOTAL
    DURATION
    IN HOURS
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS

    Chokoloskee Island
    Carnestown
    Royal Palm
    Goodland
    Marco Island
    Marco Island Bridge
    Isle of Capri
    Naples Manor
    Collier County EOC
    Naples
    Pine Ridge
    Naples Park
    Bonita Shores
    STORM
    TRACK
    12.51
    12.5
    11.5
    12
    12
    12
    11.51

    1125

    11.5
    11.51
    11.5
    11-5
    1
     12
    11.5
    10.5
    10.5
    10.5
    10.5
    10
    10
    9
    9
    8.5
    8
    7.5
    4
    2.5
    1.5
    3
    2.5
    2
    2
    .5
    -1
    ( 0
    (0
    (0
    (15
    (0
    (0
    (0
    (0
    (0
    S)
    S)
    s)
    wS)
    S)
    S)
    S)
    S)
    S)
    16
    14.Si .'
    13.5
    15
    14.5
    14
    14
    12.5
    3

    8.5
    ( 0
    (0
    (o
    (15
    (
    (15
    (15
    (15
    (15
    (15
    (o
    (
    (
    S)
    S)
    .S)
    WS)
    S)
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    wS)
    S)
    S)
    S)
    1
    (30 WS)
    PARALLEL
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 3

    TOTAL
    DURATi
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HOURS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS
    HOURS BEFORE-
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(l)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    15

    15
    14.53
    15
    14.5
    14.5
    14.51
    15
    14.5
    14 I
    14
    14
    I

    I
    3
    3
    Chokoloskee Island
    Carnestown
    Royal Palm
    Goodland
    Marco Island
    Marco Island Bridge
    Isle of Capri
    Naples Manor
    Collier County EOC
    Naples-
    Pine Ridge
    Napl].es Park
    Bonita Shores
    4
    3
    2.5
    3.5
    3.5
    2.5
    2.5
    2
    1
    0
    0

    1.5
    ( 0
    (0
    (15
    (15
    (15
    (15
    (15
    (15
    (15
    (0
    ( 0
    S)
    S)
    WS)
    ws)
    wS)
    WS)
    wS)
    WS
    )
    wS)
    S)
    S)
    16
    15
    14.5
    15.5
    15.5
    14.5
    14.5
    14
    13
    12 .
    1

    9
    14.5
    13
    12
    12
    12
    11.5
    11.5
    11
    11
    10.5
    10
    9.5
    9.5
    (15 WS).
    ( o S)
    ( 0- a
    ( o S)
    (15 WS)
    ( 0 S)
    ( 0 S)
    ( 0 S)
    (15 WS)
    ( 0 S)
    ( 0 S)
    ( o S)
    '( 0  S)
    (15 WS)
    4

    APPENDIX 1
    PARALLEL
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 4
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    TOTAL
    DURATIOQ
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HOURS
     GRID
    I .4  STORM
    POINTS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(1)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    I .Chokoloskee Island
    Carnestown
    Royal Palm
    Goodland
    I Marco Island
    Marco Island Bridge
    Isle of Capri
    I i Naples Manor
    Collier County EOC
    I , Naples
    I ;Pine Ridge
    Naples Park
    Bonita Shores
    15.5
    14
    14
    15
    15
    14
    14
    13
    12.5

    13.5
    3.5
    2
    2
    3
    3
    2
    2
    1
    .5
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    WS
    )
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    WS
    )
    WS
    )
    WS)
    WS)
    13
    12.5
    12
    12
    12
    12
    12
    11.5
    11
    10.5
    10
    10
    9.5
    (30
    (30
    (45
    (30
    (30
    (45
    (45
    (30
    (45
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    WS
    )
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    WS
    )
    WS)
    WS
    )
    WS)
    WS
    )
    WS
    )
    WS)
    WS)
    WS
    )
    15
    15
    15.5
    16
    16
    16
    16
    16
    15.5
    16
    16
    16
    16
    1.5
    (60 WS)
    PARALLEL - 60 WS ONLY
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 5
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    TOTAL
    DURATIO?'
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HOURS
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(1)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    I   Chokoloskee Island
    Carnestown
    .Royal Palm
     Goodland
     Marco Island
    .Marco Island Bridge

     Naples Manor
    Collier County EOC
    Naples
     Pine Ridge
    I Naples Park
    Bonita Shores
    2
    14
    11
    10
    9.5
    10
    10.5
    10
    10
    9.5
    9
    8.5
    8
    7.5
    7.5
    10.5
    _ 9.5
    -  - 11
    11.5
    12.5
    12
    12
    12
    12
    11.5
    11.5
    11
    11.5
    1.5
    1.5
    13.5
    13.5
    0
    8.5
    1.5
    12.5
    5

    APPENDIX 1
    CROSS ING
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 1
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)

    10
    10
    9
    8
    7.5
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    7.5
    TOTAL
    DURK
    STORM	IND*
    TRACK	HOURS

    (15 NS)	10 I
    (0  S)	9.5
    (15 SS)	8
    (15 NS)	10
    (15 NS)	9.
    (15 SS)	7
    (o s)
    (15 SS)	97 1
    (15 SS)	8.5
    (15 SS)	8*
    (15 SS)	9
    (15 SS)	10
    (15 SS)
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS

    Chokoloskee Island
    Carnestown
    Royal Palm
    Goodland
    Marco Island
    Marco Island Bridge
    Isle of Capri
    Naples Manor
    Collier County EOC
    Naples
    Pine Ridge
    Naples Park
    Bonita Shores

    CROSSING
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(1)

    2

    -1.5
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS

    (15 NS)	15

    (15 NS)	'11.5
    1
    ( 0 S)
    2.5
    3
    (30 SS)
    5.5
    I
    TOTAL
    DURA1
    STORM	.. IN
    TRACK	HOUR
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 2
    ItOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    GRID
    STOIC!
    POINTS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(l)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOIURS

    12
    10.5
    11�1
    10.
    10
    .11�
    11.
    9.
    11
    10 �l
    10.
    12
    I
    Chokoloskee Island
    Carnestown
    Royal Palm
    Goodland
    Marco Island
    Marco Island Bridge
    Isle of Capri
    Naples Manor
    Collier County EOC
    Naples'
    IPine Ridge
    Naples Park
    Bonita Shores
    2
    -1.5

    0
    -.5

    2

    3.5
    (15 NS)	15
    (15 NS)	11.5

    (15 NS)	13
    (15 NS)	12.5

    (0   S)	4

    (30 SS)	6.5
    12
    12
    10.5
    10
    9
    9.5
    9.5
    9.5
    9.5
    9
    9.5
    9.5
    9
    ( 0
    (0
    (U5
    (0
    (0
    (15
    (0
    (0
    (30
    (15
    (30
    (30
    (15
    s)
    ._
    s)
    s-
    )
    S)
    s
    )
    S)
    S)
    s)
    ss
    )
    SS)
    SS)
    ss)
    SS)
    SS)
    I

    '
    I
    I

    APPENDIX 1
    CROSSING
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIIES
    - CATEGORY 3
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    TOTAL
    DURATION
    IN
    HOURS
    GRID
    I STORM
    POINTS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(l)
    TOTAL
    DURATION
    IN HOIRS
    STORM
    TRACK
    STORM
    TRACK
    Chokoloskee Island
    Carnestown
    Royal Palm
    Goodland
    I   Marco Island
    Marco Island Bridge
    Isle of Capri
    i Naples Manor
    Collier County EOC
    Naples
    Pine Ridge
    I Naples Park
    Bonita Shores
    (15
    (15
    (15
    (1_
    5
    (15
    (15
    (0
    (0
    (0
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    S)
    S)
    S)
    15.5
    13.5.'
    12
    13.5
    14
    13.5
    7.5
    6.5
    11.5

    8
    10
    10
    9
    8.5
    8
    8
    8
    8.5
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    ( 0
    (0
    (15
    (15
    ( 0
    (1.
    5
    ( 0
    (15
    (0
    (1.5
    (15
    (15
    (1.
    5
    S)
    S)
    SS)
    SS)
    S)
    SS)
    S)
    SS)
    S)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    11.5
    12
    11
    10.5
    11.5
    10
    11.5
    11
    12
    11.5
    12
    12
    12.5
    2.5
    .5
    -1
    .5
    1
    .5
    2.5
    .5
    -.5

    3.5
    (30 SS)

    ,,
    7

    LEE COUNTY - TABLE OF CONTENTS

    Section                                            Page #

    Hurricane Vulnerability ..............................II-B-1
    Recent Storm History .................................II-B-7
    Affected Population ..................................II-B-8
    Motor Vehicles .......................................II-B-12
    Shelters .............................................II-B-14
    Routes ...............................................II-B-19
    Clearance Times .......................................II-B-19
    1991 Forecasts .......................T ..............II-B-35

    APPENDIX - Hazard Times .............1................1

    LIST OF MAPS
    Map                                                  Page #

    1. SLOSH Model Storm History Points ..................II-B-2
    2. Maximum Areas Subject to Flooding .................I I-B-3
    3. Evacuation Zones ..................................II-B-9
    4.  Red Cross Managed Public Shelter Locations ........ II-B-15
    5. Evacuation Routes .................................II-B-20
    6.  Routes Subject to Rainfall Flooding ...............II-B-26

    LIST OF TABLES
    Table                                                 Page #

    1. Predicted Coastal Storm Surges ....................II-B-4
    2. Hurricane Simulated by Surge Model ................II-B-5
    3. Selected Storm Tracks .............................II-B-7
    4. 1987 Housing Units ................................II-B-10
    5. Population Estimates ..............................II-B-11
    6. Vehicle Estimates .................................II-B-13
    7. Shelters ..........................................II-B-14
    8. Public Shelter Capacity ...........................II-B-17
    9. Population Displacement Ratio ....... ..............I-B-
    10. Shelter Satisfaction ..............................II-B-18
    11.  Evacuation Route Capacity Calculation .............II-B-21
    12. Pre-Landfall Flood Conditions .....................I1-B-27
    13. Shelter Designations and Options ..................II-B-28
    14. Time to Clear .....................................II-B-31
    15. Ultimate Constricting Route .......................II-B-30
    16. County Exiting Routes ...........................II-B-32
    17. Total Evacuation Time ............................II-B-34
    18.  Housing Units, 1991....11-.B736
    18;  ousig Unts, 991.............................-B6
    19. Population Estimates, 1991 ........................I 1B-37
    20. Motor Vehicle Estimates, 1991 .....................II-B-38
    21. Revised Capacities ................................II-B-40
    22. Shelter Capacities, 1991 ..........................II-B-39
    23. Shelter Satisfactions, 1991 .................i ......II-B-41
    24. Revised Time to Clear, 1991 .......................II-B-42
    25.  Ultimate Constricting Route, 1991 ...................I1-B-43
    26. Exiting Routes, 1991.II-B-44
    .......	T'''   ime,19.......'............'I-B-45
    27.   To~i Time,	199].....I

    LEE COUNTY
    PEACETIME EMERGENCY PLAN (Hurricanes)
    [9J-5.012(2)(e)(i)]

    IIURRICANE VULNERABILITY

    ! The hurricane vulnerability of Lee County has been analyzed using
    I    a  numerical storm surge prediction model known as  SLOSH,  short
    for Sea,  Lake,  and Overland Surges from Hurricanes.  This model
    is described in detail in the Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan,
    1981-82,	prepared  by  the Southwest Florida  Regional	Planning
    Council;	as  well as A Storm Surge Atlas for Southwest	Florida,
    :	prepared	by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
    3	Undated,	@  1983).   These  reports analyzed some  187  separate
    storms for their potential impact on Southwest Florida, including
    Lee County.	Both reports provide an assessment of methodologies
    3	and  provide	assumptions  that can  act  towards  increasing	or
    U	decreasing  forecast  flood and  wind  conditions.   However,	in
    summary, the following assumptions can be made.

    I    (1)	Landfalling storms provide the worst flooding potential

    (2)	Flooding will be worse south of the eye of the hurricane

    (3)	Wind	conditions making roads unsafe for travel will	arrive
    well	before  the eye of the hurricane,  and usually	before
    |3  ~	flood waters inundate evacuation routes

    (4)	Storm  landfall  prediction is not an  exact  science.   Any
    approaching  storm has the capacity to strengthen  or  veer,
    I           decreasing or increasing the flooding and surge potential of
    the storm.-                                                    -

    | The  SLOSIt model  used  sixteen points in Lee  County	for	time
    history  analysis.   These  points are depicted on  Map	1.	The
    greatest height of stormwaters for each category storm for each
    point are summarized in Table 1.

    The  SLOSH  model also provided maps of the flooding that may  be
     expected in Lee County.  The 187 different simulations  have been
    I    summarized  by flood category,  and a zone for each category  has
    been	created depicting the maximum extent of flooding  resulting
    from	all of the storms of that category.   The five  zones  thus
    i   created are depicted on Map 2.
    I
    �.  . . . . . ;,..        - ..             -:.:..:''.,.: ':'':'�'"  ~'";
    - " " : i.--i 3
    II-B-1

    -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2
    16

    5  10.

    H~~~~~~~~~1

    H~~~~~~~~~1

    w~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

     5 FOOT CONTOUR LINES

    ASTORM HISTORY POINTS
    I PT. MYERS BEACH	9	CALOOSAHATCH-EE R.
    2	FT: MYERS 13CI. BRIDGE	10	NEW BRIDGE'
    3	SANIBEL ISLAND	11	EAST FORT MYERS
    4	PUNTA BASSA	12	BLIND PASS
    5	SHELL POINT	13	PINE ISLAND SOUND
    *  6	CAPE CORAL PARKWAY	14	PINE ISLAND CENTER
    * 7	IIARNEY POINT               . 15 RATLACHA
    0            3   4   5(Miles)    8	IONA,                             16  BOCA GRANDE
    SWfRPC, DEC 87- RNC
    V             ~MAP I
    LEE.COUNTY
    SLOSH MODEL STORM HISTORY POINTS'
    M-M-M-

    CHARLOTTE  CO.,,

    3~~~~
    5
    1
    7- '
    r-
    -IrN

    C)
    .  -n II

    '7-
    1 m
    0
    H
    I
    w
    IA
    LEGEND
    NOTE: FLOOD HEIGHTS
    AT SHORELINE
    UP TO 9 FEET
    V7A60VE MEAN
    LJ  SEA LEVELJMSL)

    K]UP TO 12
    FEET
    F     ABOVE MSL

    72UP TO 17 FEET
    L2  ABOVE  MSL*

    F1UP TO 20 FEET
    E~lUP TO 23 FEET
    ABOVE MSL

    I

    I

    ,
    I
    I
    I !   ~ MAP 2       *21V
    LEE COUNTY         /
    MAXIMUM AREAS SUBJECT TO FLOODING
    IBY'STORM CATEGORY.

    0  1 2             MILES

    I
    TABLE 1
    PREDICTED COASTAL STORM SURGES SIMULATED BY
    SLOSH MODEL- LANDFALLING STORMS
    (If a point is over water, surge is reported in feet
    flooding above msl; if a point is on land, surge
    reported in feet above land at that point)*
    of
    is
    ELEVATION
    OF POINT
    STORM
    I -	2
    8	1.-
    '1.0..
    9	11
    6  -	8  ..'
    7	9
    8	10
    6	8
    5	10
    5	7
    5	12
    2	9

    5	6
    7	8
    -	4
    5	8
    5	8
    CATEGORY
    3     4      5
    GRID POINT
    17
    ].
    8
    14
    16
    17
    18
    20
    15
    21
    17
    8
    11
    14
    10
    15
    13
    Fort Myers Beach
    Ft. Myers Beach Bridge
    Sanibel
    Punta Rassa
    Shell Point
    Cape Coral Parkway
    Hlarney Point
    Iona
    River
    New Bridge
    East Fort Myers
    Blind Pass
    Pine Island Sound
    Pine Island Center
    Matlacha
    Boca Grande
    1
    1
    1
    1
    1
    4
    3
    5
    1
    5
    15
    1
    1
    5
    1
    1
    14
    14
    12
    13
    14
    13
    14
    12
    17
    13
    4
    9
    12
    11
    12
    10
    16
    17
    13
    16
    17
    17
    19
    16
    23
    10
    11
    10
    13.5
    10
    15
    12
    I
    I
    I
    *See Map 1 for grid point locations.
    I
    I
    I
    Although storms cannot be accurately forecasted in
    regard to
    storm behavior, the 187 simulations did provide insights into the
    differences	in	pre-landfall   flooding   for    landfalling,
    paralleling,	and	crossing  storms.    These  differences	are
    summarized  in Table 2 for hurricane eye location and  points	of
    worst  impact.- Table 3 summarizes the nature of flood and  wiand_-
    variation based on whether the storm is landfalling, crossing, or
    paralleling.   Appendix  A summarizes the pre-eye landfall hazard
    times that the County may experience.

    I

    I

    I

    I

    II-B--4

    I

    TABLE 2
    HURRICANES SIMULATED BY NUMERICAL
    STORM SURGE PREDICTION MODEL
    1,	C
    O	A
    C	T
    M	A	E
    O	T	T	G    : LANDF
    D	Y	I	O
    E	P	O	R        CLO
    L	E	N	Y

    SL	L	5NS	1	:Sanibe
    SL	L	5NS	2	:Sanibe
    SL	L	5NS	3	:Sanibe
    SL	L	5NS	4	:Sanibe
    SL	L	5NS	5	:Sanibe
    FALL/EXITING POINT
    OR
    )SEST APPROACH
    AREA RECEIVING
    MAXIMUM SURGE/WINDS
    :1 Island. -
    l Island
    el Island
    e1 Island
    31 Island
    Fort Myers Beach
    Fort Myers Beach
    Fort Myers Beach
    Fort Myers Beach
    Fort Myers Beach

    Fort Myers Beach
    Fort Myers Beach
    Fort Myers Beach
    Fort Myers Beach
    Fort Myers Beach

    1	:Sanibel-Captiva
    2	:Sanibel-Captiva
    3	:Sanibel-Captiva
    4	:Sanibel-Captiva
    5	:Sanibel-Captiva
    ST.
    SL
    SL
    SL
    SL
    L O1NS
    L IONS
    L 10NS
    L  IONS
    L 1ONS
    SL	L	15NS
    SL	L	15NS
    SlT	L	15NS
    SL	L	15NS
    SL	L.	15NS

    SL	L	20NS
    S	L	20ONS
    ST,	L	20NS
    SL	L	20NS
    SL	L	20NS-
    I	:Captiva Island
    2	:Captiva Island
    3	:Captiva Island
    4	:Captiva Island
    5	:Captiva Island

    1	:Upper Captiva Island
    2	:Upper Captiva Island
    3	:Upper Captiva Island
    4	:Upper Captiva Island
    5	:Upper Captiva Island

    1	:Cayo Costa
    2	:Cayo Costa
    3	:Cayo Costa
    4	:Cayo Costa.
    5	:Cayo Costa

    I	:Gasparilla Island
    2	:Gasparilla Island
    3	:Gasparilla Island
    4	:Gasparilla Island
    5	:Gasparilla Island
    Caloosahatchee River
    Caloosahatchee River
    Caloosahatchee River
    Caloosahatchee River
    Caloosahatchee River

    Caloosahatchee River
    Caloosahatchee River
    Caloosahatchee River
    Caloosahatchee River
    Caloosahatchee -R4iv'er

    Caloosahatchee River
    Caloosahatchee River
    Caloosahatchee River
    Caloosahatchee River
    Caloosahatchee River

    Caloosahatchee River
    Caloosahatchee River
    Caloo'sahatchee River
    Caloosahatchee River
    Caloosahatchee River
    I
    I

    I
    I
    I
    SL	L
    SL	L
    SL	L
    SL	L
    SL	L

    SL	L
    Sr	L

    S,	L

    KEY:  Sl	-
    L -
    C -
    25NS
    25NS
    25NS
    25NS
    25NS

    30NS
    30NS
    30NS
    30NS
    30NS
    SLOSH (Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges from Hurricanes) Model
    Landfalling Hurricane
    Crossing Hurricane (Exiting Hurricane)
    P .- Paral]el.ing HIurricane .
    SS - South of Sanibel 'Islahd                                    ' ""
    NS - North of Sanibel Island
    II-B-5

    TABLE 2 (Continuedi
    HURRICANES SIMULATED BY NUMERICAL
    STORM SURGE PREDICTION MODEL
    L	C
    0	A
    C	T
    M	A	E
    0	T	T	G   : LANDFALL/EXITING POINT
    D	Y	I	0              OR                   AREA RECEIVING
    E	P	0	R	:  CLOSEST APPROACH          MAXIMUM SURGE/WINDS
    L	E	N	Y	:
    , o  Sanie
    w. of Sanibel
    w. of Sanibel
    w. of Sanibel
    w. of Sanibel

    1	:30
    2	:30
    3	:30
    4	:30
    SL	P	3OWS
    SL	P	3oWS
    SL	P	30'S
    SL	P	30WS
    mi.
    mi.
    mi.
    mi.
    Sanibel
    Sanibel
    Sanibel
    Sanibel
    w. of Sanibel
    w. of Sanibel
    w. of Sanibel
    w. of Sanibel
    Fort Myers Beach
    Fort' Myers Beach
    Fort Myers Beach
    Fort Myers Beach

    Shell. Point
    Shell Point
    Shell Point
    SL
    SL
    Sl
    SL

    SL
    SL
    SL
    P	45WS
    P	45WS
    P	45WS
    P	45WS

    C	15SS
    C	15SS
    C	15SS
    1	:45
    2	:45
    3	:45
    4	:45
    mi.
    mi.
    mi.
    mi.
    I
    I
    1	:Fort Myers
    2	:Fort Myers
    3	:Fort Myers
    I
    I
    1	:Sanibel
    2	:Sanibel
    3	:Sanibel

    1	:Naples
    2	:Naples
    3	:Naples
    Ft. Myers Beach Bridge
    Ft. Myers Beach Bridge
    Ft. Myers Beach Bridge

    Ft. Myers Beach Bridge
    Ft. Myers Beach Bridge
    Ft. Myers Beach Bridge
    SL
    SL
    SL

    SL
    ST,
    SL
    C O S
    C O S
    C	0 S

    C	15NS
    C	15NS
    C	15NS
    I
    I

    KEY: SIL - SLOSH (Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges from
    L - Landfallin?g Hurricane
    C - Crossing Hurricane (Exiting Hurricane)
     - Paralleling Hurricane
    SS - South of Sanibel Island
    NS - North of Sanibel Island
    WS - West of Sanibel Island
    Hurricanes) Model
    I

    I
    I
    I
    II-B-6

    TABLE 3
    SELECTED STORM TRACTS BY CATEGORY AND TYPE
    STORM
    CRARACTERISICS
    STORM
    TRACK
    STORM
    CHARACTERISTICS
    STORM
    TRACK
    5(1)
    S(3)
    S (2)
    S(2)
    S(1)
    W(.)
    W(M)
    W(l)

    W(2)
    W(2)
    W(2)

    W(l)
    W(2)
    W(3)
    W(3)
    W(3)
    W(1)
    15E S-P--2
    o S-P-2
    3OWS-P-2
    GOWS-P-2

    15ES --P--3
    o S-P-3
    30W5-P-3
    50WS-P-3

    15SS-C--1
    15NS-C-1

    459S--C--2
    I5SS-C-2
    15NS---C--2

    45SS-C-3
    15SS-C-3
    15NS-C-3
    S (2)
    S(3)
    5(2)
    S(1)

    S(3)
    S(4)
    S(2)
    S(2)
    W(1)
    W(2)
    W(l)

    W(2)
    W(3)
    W(2)
    W(1)
    5SS-L--l
    155NS--L--1
    35NS -L- 1.
    55NS-L-1
    75NS-L-1
    5SS- L-2
    15NS-L-2
    35NS-L-2
    55SS--L--2
    75NS-I,--2
    S(1)
    S(3)
    S(3)
    S(3)
    S(2)
    5(I) W(1)
    S(2) W(1)
    45SS-L-3
    25SS-L-3
    5SS-L-3
    15NS-L-3
    35NS-L-3
    55NS-L-3
    75NS-L-3
    S(1)
    S(3)
    S(4)
    S(4)
    S(3)
    S(3)
    5(1)
    st2)
    S(2)

    S(2)
    s(3)
    S(2)
    W(1)
    w(1)

    W(1)
    W(2)
    W(2)
    S(2)
    S(3) W(l)
    S(2)
    5(1)
    15ES-P-1
    0 S-P-1
    30WS-P-l
    6OWS-P-1
    KEY: SS - South of Sanibel
    NS - North of Sanibel
    ES - East of Sanibel
    WS - West of Sanibel
    S - Storm Surge
    L - Landfalling
    P - Parallel
    C - Crossing
    W - Wind (over
    40 mph)
    (1) - Category 1
    (2) - Category 2
    (3) - Category 3
    (4) - Category..4..
    Saffir-Si mpSon Scale
    Surge      Wind
    Category
    Category
    Category
    Category
    Category
    (1)
    (2)
    (3)
    (4)
    (5)
    4 - 5 ft.
    6 - 8 ft.
    9 -12 f`t.
    13 -138 ft.
    18+ feet
    74-95 mph
    .96-l10 mph
    111-130 mph
    131-155 mph
    155 + mph
    Recent Storm History

    Hurricane Donna was the last hurricane to affect Lee County to
    any  significant  degree.   At the time the  hurricane  hit,  the
    County's population was 56,000, concentrated primarily in Fort
    My-ers  and	the  unincorporated  inland  are.as. of  1Lee t
    116rri cane	Donna"'was a strong Category 3 when it-passed over  the
    area,  but	because the eye hugged the coast  so  closely,  storm
    II-B-7

    !

    surges were much less than they could have been.   Tides at Punta
    Rassa were 6.4 feet above msl, Fort Myers Beach had 8.1 feet and
    high tide lines were found at the 10-foot contour bordering the
    Estero and Imperial Rivers.  Estero Island was swept by tides and
    wave action which lowered 5 to 7 foot dunes by several feet,
    exposing and undermining foundations and toppling homes.	In the
    South  Banks  area of Captiva Island,  tides of 4 to 5 feet	above
    normal overtopped the island,  cutting through the narrow beaches
    to  the bay in several places.   A new entrance was cut to  Blind
    Pass  about one-fourth mile south of the Blind Pass  Bridge.   In
    Lee County, the Bonita Beach area was hardest hit, because nearly
    all  beachfront  homes were badly damaged.., or  destroyed.	Those
    farther   inland   sustained  tidal  flooding' with  only	minor
    structural damage.   Estimated damage totaled $16,449,000.

    Hurricane Floyd provided the area a scare on October 16, 1987.
    However,  it  veered  due  east before the  County  received  any
    impacts beyond gale force wind gusts and 6-7 inches of rain which
    flooded  four  of the five main evacuation  routes.  A  voluntary
    evacuation order put approximately 850 persons in public shelters
    and  an unknown number in area hotels,  homes,  and out of region
    locations.

    Affected Population

    Each zone depicted on Map 2 encompasses large segments of the
    County   population.	Each	one	has  a  certain   degree   of
    vulnerability  to  the	threat	of	hurricane  induced  flooding.
    Category 1 zones have the most repeated threat potential, whereas
    it is highly unlikely (but the potential exists) that category 5
    areas  will  need  to  evacuate  during  the  comprehensive  plan
    horizon.

    Each  zone,  as  drafted, mimics  the  coastline.   Geographically,
    however,	these zones are too cumbersome to assess the timing and
    shelter	needs -of the population.   Consequently,	in association-
    with the Lee County Emergency Management Division,	new	subzones
    were  created  consistent  with the existing  evacuation	routes,
    natural and manmade barriers and neighborhood or community
    boundaries where possible.   As much as possible,  subzones	were
    identified  with commonly understood names.   These subzones	are
    depicted on Map 3.

    The	first element in preparing an estimate of County	population
    is	to  estimate dwelling units,  and dwelling	Unit	types..  By
    counting  roof-tops  from	a 1987 Lee  County	REDI-book  '(aerial
    photograph),  supplemented	by information on RV Parks  from  the
    Department  of fHealth and Rehabilitative Services and information
    from the Florida Department of Community Affairs, it is estimated
    that  there are 166,930 dwellings in the county. . This  estimate
    includes	conventional housing,  mobile homes,  and  transitional
    housing	such as inhabited travel trailers,  and hotel and  motel
    units.	The greatest concentration of. these,  62% are lopatq.d in   ...."
    t-e C.tegory I Zone.--- Table 4 provides the'estimat:e-off  dwellng- ... '
    units in the County by flood zone and by subzone name.

    II-B-8                                      3

    	-  - - - - -  - - - - - - -

    I	- .    -9

    BOCA                                      I                                                   I	N.E. RIVER/ALVA
    GRANDE	NORTH FORT MYERS
    J                  NORTH FORT MYERS           ,      ]

    0
    LEGEND
    A. OLD FORT MYERS
    B. CENTRAL FORT MYERS
    C. SUMMERLIN
    D. PAGE FIELD/VILLAS
    2      MILES  E. WEST SOUTH FORT MYERS
    SWFRPC,RNC I
    MAP 3
    LEE COUNTY
    EVACUATION ZONES

    TABLE 4
    LEE COUNTY - HOUSING UNITS

    Hotel-
    Motel
    Residential
    Single-Family
    Mobile Recreational
    Home     Vehicle
    Storm
    Category
    Condo
    Total
    Apartment
    Zone
    166
    3,648
    3,015
    2,532
    23
    6,133
    5,707
    2,018
    455
    0
    1,204
    0
    697
    90
    475
    0
    92
    0
    156
    526
    1,651
    69
    298
    54
    1,266
    77
    619
    803
    25,976
    10,814
    13,100
    7,169
    19,867
    17,087
    3,363
    5,210
    1.     Boca Grande            473
    1 Pine Island/Cape Coral
    	13,204
    1	Sanibel/Captiva	5,223
    1	N. Ft. Myers/River	7,814
    1	N.E. River/Alva	3,621
    1'.	Iona/Cypress Lake	7,244
    1	Ft.Myers Beach/Estero	3,990
    1 Bonita Bch./Spring Creek	744
    8
    3,713
    531
    326
    1,869
    3,250
    1,675
    111
    148
    0
    3,141
    299
    0
    1,121
    1,724
    3,804
    157
    0
    0
    540
    95
    1,662
    147
    987
    645
    164
    1,268
    2,720
    1    Old Fort Myers

    - _ -    -  --                         - --- -- - -               __             -----------___- -- -�
    11,631    10,246
    23,697
    2,558
    4,716   103,389
    45,033
    5,508
    TOTALS
    FLOOD ZONE 1
    7,912
    3,509
    6,158
    2,892
    5,211
    6,908
    753
    7 q1
    155
    0
    1,967
    0
    672
    2,507
    6
    1) CZ C
    1,037
    141
    621
    14
    2,620
    245
     �O
    ;:'qrx
    170
    208
    0
    0
    852
    0
    a0
    q,... n
    244
    50
    153
    0
    270
    102
    0
    n
    2.
    2:
    2:
    2
    H          n
    2-
    2.
    Bonita Springs
    San Carlos Park
    Central Fort Myers
    W.S. Fort Myers
    Summerlin
    Tice
    Orange River
    2,954
    3,024
    2,992
    1,306
    261
    3,277
    148
    1: ron"
    1,347
    86
    378
    1,271
    242
    602
    365
    ' no
    2,005
    0
    47
    301
    294
    175
    234
    o
    2	North Cape Coral	3,8Z	,2 UY I0                                                                       , tbl

    TOTALS	FLOOD ZONE 2	17,854	5,800      3,063        5,575         5,213      2,150	819    40,474

    3.	E.S. Fort Myers	711	0	0	0	20	0	0	731
    3	Page Field/Villas	1,524	0	0	81	147	14	575	2,341
    3	Six Mile/Ortiz	367	6	0	336	0	0	0	709
    3	North Fort Myers	1,882	8,093	1,337	69	0	0	485	11,866

    TOTALS	FLOOD ZONE 3	4,484	8,099	1,337	486	167	14	1,060	15,647

    4	Lehigh North	375	279	0	62	49	0	0	765
    4	Gateway	8	10	0	0	0	0	0	18
    4.	Corkscrew	89	0	0	0	49	0	0	138

    TOTALS	FLOOD ZONE 4	472	289	0	62	98	0	0	921

    5	Lehigh South	4,772	0	0	323        1,275	0	124	6,494
    5.	East County            5	0	0	0            0	0	0          5
    a
    _    _T.S9 _  FI   ZOi _       4,7         _    _ G       0      * in3  _   1I M _   4 024   8.4

    Using  the housing unit estimate,  a population estimate is  then
    I
    made.   Two additional assumptions, however, are needed:  persons
    per  household,  and  vacancy rate.   Persons per  household  was
    estimated at a standard of 2.4 persons per household,  regardless
    e    of  unit.   Whereas  this assumption has  inaccuracies,  the  end
    result probably does not differ significantly from a more
    detailed analysis.  More detailed analysis, however, is needed to
    3    determine vacancy rates for unit type, since different unit types
    have  different vulnerability to flood or wind hazards.   Using a
    survey estimate developed from postaL vacancy rates and calling
    3	businesses  listed in the phone book,  two estimates of  seasonal
    a	vacancy were prepared.  These are as foll'ows:

    Unit Type               Seasonal Occupancy Rates
    I              -July                                         November

    Single-Family Unit	97%	97%
    Duplex	94	93
    I
    Apartment	70	78
    Condominium (Conventional)	51	64
    Mobile Hlome	43	75
    m3    ~ Travel Trailer	18	41
    Motel/Hotel	54	63

    3      Lee	County  is estimated in 1987 to average 278,741	persons	in
    July	and	318,222  persons at the start of  November.	This	is
    summarized	by  subzone in Table 5.   Numerically,	the	greatest
    seasonality	occurs  in  Hurricane Category  Zone	1,  which	has
    *    187,944 persons in July and 223,703 in November,	an increase	of
    16%.

    3                                     TABLE 5
    LEE COUNTY POPULATION ESTIMATE FOR EVACUATION ZONES

    Storm	Population Estimates
    Category       -  Zone	July	November  _ _

     1  ~ Boca Grande	1,514	1,606
    I
    Pine Island/Matlacha	8,500	9,318
    Cape Coral	36,198	39,724
    Sanibel/Captiva	18,826	20,714
    m|     ~ North Fort Myers/River	19,559	20,579
    North River	6,519	6,860
    N.E. River/Alva	1],707	13,859
    I~ ~lona/Cypress Lake	31,270	36,820
    '3~ ~       Fort Myers Beach/Estero	22,371.	27,934
    Bonita Beach/Spring Creek	4,969	5,814
    Old Fort Myers	9,974	10,607
    I      Mobile Htomes & Recreational Vehicles 16,537	29,868
    not otherwise included in the above
    flood prone areas (Category 2-5 Areas)

    TOTAL AREA 1            187,949,.       223..,703. ....X     - .E  '*:'7
    II-B-l11

    TABLE 5 (Continuedl
    LEE COUNTY POPULATION ESTIMATE FOR EVACUATION ZONES

    Storm	Population Estimates
    Category          Zone	July	November

    ;    2	Bonita Springs	11,362	13,906
    ':~ ~	San Carlos Park	7,836	7,952
    Central Fort Myers	11,638	12,558
    W.S. Fort Myers	4,499	5,646
    Summerlin	.7,593	8,925
    Tice	12,9.70	14,108
    Orange River                 833	1,243
    North Cape Coral	13, 802	15,161
    Mobile Hlomes & Recreational Vehicles	9,228	16,414
    not otherwise included in the above
    flood prone areas (Category 3-5 Areas)

    ;NEW EVACUEES	63,224	66,045
    TOTALS 1 - 2	251,168	289,748

    3       E.S. Fort Myers	1,679	1,686
    Page Field/Villas	4,641	4,826
    Six Mile/Ortiz	l1,418	1,494
    North Fort Myers	14,056	21,126
    Mobile Homes & Recreational Vehicles   298               520
    not otherwise included in the above
    flood prone areas (Category 4-5 Areas)

    NEW EVACUEES	12,864	13,238
    TOTALS 1 - 3	264,032	302,986

    4        Lehigh North                  1,325          1,566
    Gateway	29	37
    Corkscrew	267	282
    Mobile Homes & Recreational Vehicles        0              0    - -
    not otherwise included in the above
    flood prone areas (Category 5 Area)

    NEW EVACUEES               1,323          1,365
    TOTALS 1 - 4            265,355         304,351
    I
     . 5       Lehigh South                13,374         13,859
    East County                    12             12
    I
    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    NEW EVACUEES	13,386	13,871.
    ~!'~ ~        TOTALS 1 - 5	278,741	31S,222

     Motor Vehicles

    Nearly  all  of the population affected by an oncoming  hurricane
    will evacuate by private vehicle.   The question arises over  how
    many vehicles will be used in the. evacuation.  Issues relevant to
    this  include thc: number of' vehicles own'ed, whether' (wners woul '""
    be willing to leave any vehicles behind (since next to the  home,

    II-B-12                                   I

    vehicles.are the most expensive possession),  whether all drivers
    feel confident to operate a vehicle in storm conditions, and
    whether	evacuating	families wish to be separated  in	different
    motor	vehicles.	Based  on  surveys,   respondents	indicated
    approximately 75% of available vehicles would be used in an
    evacuation.    (Hurricane Evacuation Plan, 1981-82, SWFRPC).  This
    averaged out to 1.1 vehicles per occupied unit.

    Using  this	ratio  of	cars,	and  the  occupancy	ratio   used
    previously,	the  total	number	of county vehicles	used  in  an
    evacuation in July would be 127,487,- .and in November would be
    146,019. Category I Zones again have the greatest number of
    vehicles, 78,367 (85,078 with mobile homes outside the Category 1
    area) in July and 89,187 (100,892 with mobile homes) in November.
    Table 6 summarizes the vehicle generation by each community.

    TABLE 6
    LEE COUNTY VEHICLE ESTIMATES FOR EVACUATION
    MOBILE HOME &
    JULY   REC. VEHICLES
    MOBILE HOME &
    REC. VEHICLES
    NOVEMBER
    CATEGORY
    ZONE
    1	Boca Grande
    1	Pine Island/
    Matlacha
    1	Cape Coral
    1	Sanibel/Captiva
    1	N.Ft.Myers/River
    1	North River
    1	Alva/North River
    1	Iona/Cypress Lake
    1	Fort Myers Beach/
    Estero
    1 ; Bonita Beach/
    Spring Creek
    1	Old Fort-Myers
    2	Bonita Springs
    2	San Carlos Park
    2	Central Ft. Myers
    2	W.S. Fort Myers
    2	Summerlin
    2	Tice
    2	Orange River
    2	North Cape Coral
    3	E.S. Fort Myers
    3	Page Field/Villas
    3	Six Mile/Ortiz
    3	North Fort Myers
    4	Lehigh North
    4	Gateway
    4	Corkscrew
    5	Lehigh South
    East County '' ;.
    695
    3,882

    16,548
    8,612
    8,965
    2,989
    5,346
    14,300
    10,185
    (    o)
    (2,321)

    (    o)
    ( 304)
    (     0)
    ( 154)
    (1,086)
    (1,847)
    (1,477)
    737
    4,383

    18,685
    9,527
    9,433
    3,144
    6,307
    16,805
    12,646

    2,659

    4,861
    6,291
    3,645
    5,754
    2,576
    4,080
    6,460
    560
    6,949
    773
    2,210
    685
    9,628
    717
    17
    129
    6,353
    (    7)
    (2.820)

    (     0)
    ( 605)
    (     0)
    ( 269)
    (2,002)
    (3,388)
    (2,942)

    ( 156)

    (  12-2)
    (1,933)
    (   71)
    ( 331)
    (1,172)
    ( 321)
    ( 569)
    ( 397)
    (1,248)
    0)
    (	o)
    (	5)
    (7,225)
    ( 230)
    (	8)
    (	O)
    (	O)
    r. .:C(.-.s;..._,y'(

    II
    2,274

    4,571
    5,172
    3,592
    5,333
    2,057
    3,475
    5,942
    378
    6,325
    770
    2,127
    654
    6,418
    607
    14
    122
    6,129
    5
    (

    (
    (
    (
    (
    (
    (
    (

    (
    (
    (
    (
    (
    (
    (
    (
    (
    81)
    70)
    998)
    41)
    187)
    655)
    168)
    317)
    .215)
    715)
    0)
    0)
    3)
    4,069)
    132)
    5)
    0)
    0)
    ' 0)            ' .-
    .  5.:,
    127,487    (14,845)   146,019    (25,821)
    II-B-13

    I
    Shelters.

    Evacuees must have a place to go.   The SWFRPC undertook  surveys
    in 1979 and 1981 to determine evacuee preferences.   This data is
    summarized as follows: public shelters (24%), leaving the County
    (341%), visit friends or go to hotel or stay home or "other"
    (21%),	"don't know" (21%).   Those are preference  declarations;
    other	studies	indicate  there is a significant	variation  from
    preference  to	actual  behavior.   For  example,	income  level,
    available warning time, and what local officials tell evacuees  to
    do, can change behavior.  Additionally, the severity of impending
    storms  or  perception  of risk may  also  change  decisions,  as
    increased community-wide evacuation .limits or eliminates the
    hotel/ friends/public shelter/stay home prediction.
    At this time, the County has thirty public shelters, with a
    capacity (at 20 square feet per person) of 59,670 persons.  These
    shelters are summarized in Table 7, by vulnerability zone. They
    are  depicted  on Map 4.	Additionally,	an  unknown  number  of
    shelter    spaces   may	exist   within	mobile   home   parks.
    IJUnfortunately, records of these shelter spaces have not been
    kept.

    Based upon the evacuees forecasted in Table 5, the county has
    limited  public shelter capacity.   For example,  the county  can
    accommodate 31.7% of the evacuees of Category 1 storm in July,
    but  only  26.7% in November.   Table 8 summarizes  the  County's
    public shelter capacities for storms.
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    TABLE 7
    LEE COUNTY PRIMARY SHELTERS
    Capacity at
    20 sq. ft.
    per person
    Zone*
    Vulner-
    ab i4 i

    3
    Beyond 5
    Beyond 5
    3

    4
    3
    1,    3
    2
    3
    3 2
    4
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    Red Cross Managed Shelter

    Allen Park Elementary School
    Alva Elementary School
    Alva Middle School
    Bayshore Elementary School
    Address
    Canelo Drive
    Center St. & Church Ave.
    Center St. & Church Ave.
    Williams Rd.
    off Bayshore
    W- Terry Street
    Del Prado Blvd.
    Del Prado Blvd.
    Santa Barbara Blvd.
    High Street
    Edgewood Avenue
    Euclid Avenue
    River Ranch Rd. off
    530
    1,040
    1,460
    1,570

    3,110
    2,610
    2, 770
    6,390
    720
    36C
    190
    Ron:ita Middle School
    Caloosa Elemcntary School.
    Caloosa Middle School
    Cape Coral Iligh School
    Dunbar Community School
    Edgewood Elementary School
    Edison Park Elementary
    Estero }Iigh School
    Corkscrew Rd.         3,260         4

    *Vulnerability accounts.for both flood.and wind hazards...Nube....::. _NA.-_
    rc:presents  that catego-ry storm and aibove for wh.ich  th" shelt er .
    cannot be used.

    l1-B-14                                         |

    CHARLOTTE   CO.,

    20-M~~-

    0
    LE�GEN'D
    NOTE: FLOOD HEIGHTS
    ATY SHORELINE
    UP TO 9 FEET
    IiiA'BOVE MEAN
    LZJSEA LEVEL(MSI

    FiUP TO 12 FEET
    F1ABOVE MSL

    iL)
    UP TO. 17 FEET
    ABOVE. MSL
    MAP 4
    LEE COUNTY
    RED CROSS MANAGED PUBLIC SHELTER LOCATIONS

    TABLE 7 (Continuedl
    LEE COUNTY PRIMARY SHELTERS
    Capacity at
    20 sq. ft.
    eE 2erson
    Zone*
    Vulner-
    abilitx
    Red Cross Managed. Shelter
    Address
    Fort Myers figh School	Cortez Rlvd.
    Franklin Park Elementary	Ford Street
    J. Colin English Elementary	Pine Island Road
    Lee County Vocational/Tech.	Michigan Avenue
    LeHigh Elementary School.	Schoolway C'ourt
    LeHigh Middle School	Arthur Avenue
    Mariner High School	Chiquita'Blvd.- &
    Tropicana Pkwy.
    North Fort Myers High School	Orange Grove Blvd.
    Orange River Elementary	Underwood Dr. off SR 80
    Orangewood Elementary School	DeLeon Avenue
    Pelican Elementary School	SW 3rd Avenue
    Riverdale High School	Buckingham Rd. off SR80
    San Carlos Elementary School	Lee Rd. off Alico Rd.
    Spring Creek Elementary	US 41 SE
    Sunshine Elementary	Sunshine Rd. off
    Lee Blvd.
    Tanglewood Elementary School	Manchester Blvd.
    Tice Elementary School	Tice Street
    Villas Elementary School	Beacon Blvd.
    2,920
    1,350
    670
    1, 640
    690
    3,020

    3,260
    1,040
    180
    490
    2,720
    6,070
    2,940
    2,580
    2,510
    3
    2
    3
    4
    Beyond 5
    --Beyond 5

    3
    2
    3
    3
    2
    3
    4
    4
    Beyond
    I
    1,310
    1, 140
    1, 130
    2
    4
    2
    I
    TOTAL: 30 Shelters
    CAPACITY:
    59,670 persons
    I
    LEE COUNTY POSSIBLE SECONDARY SHELTERS
    Capacity at
    20 sq.ft per
    Name	person

    Cypress Lake High	4,080
    Edison Community College	3,233
    2,100
    Civic Center                  2,470
    Community Center (Lee Rd.)    140
    Gulf Elementary	2,580
    Gulf Middle	4,550
    Lee County Library	670
    Lehigh Library	190
    Nature Center	250
    Suncoast School               5,700
    University of So. Florida       650
    Zone
    Vulnerability

    1
    2
    3
    2
    3
    2
    1
    3
    Beyond 5.
    3
    3
    2

    ,,
    I
    I
    '
    I
    I
    TOTAL:  11 Shelters
    CAPACITY: 26,613 persons
    I
    *Vulnerability accounts for both flood and wind hazards.
    represent.s  that category storm a-nd above. :for -which- the
    cannot be used.  -
    Number
    shelte,l�r.
    I
    I
    II-B-16

    TABLE 8
    PUBLIC SHELTER CAPACITY

    STORM                     EVACUEES               PERCENT MET
    CATEGORY	SPACE      JULY	NOVEMBER	JULY      NOVEMBER

    1	59,670	187,949	223,703	31.7	26.7

    2	45,370	251,168	289,748	18.1	15.7

    3	23,580	264,032	302,986,.	8.9	7.8

    4	8,720	265,355	304;35l1'	3.3	2.9

    5                                 N/A�

    Public  shelter  within  the  county are Dot the  only  means  of
    meeting evacuee shelter needs.   Regretfully, they seem to be the
    largest.	Other  options for evacuees include "friends,"  hotels
    and  one's	own home (refusal to  leave).	Of  these,  only  the
    m      commercial (hotel) option can be assessed.	In Lee County, there
    are an estimated 6,719 hotel/motel rooms. By far the greatest
    portion (70%) of the rooms are located on the shoreline or are in
    the  Category 1 storm surge zone.   This leaves only 2,003  units
    I
    available in a Category 1 storm, 1,184 in Category 2 and only
    124 in Category 3, 4, and 5 storms.

    m      The  2,003  units at 100% occupancy (4 persons per  room),  would
    satisfy 4.8% of the demand for shelter in July and 3.7% in
    November in a Category 1 storm.  In a Category 2 storm, only 2.1%
    in  July and 1.7% in November will be sheltered in this  fashion.
    Category 3 and greater storms, the percentage is less than 1.

    In summary,  the table below shows how much of the county evacuee
    needs  are met by the available public and. commercial hote]/mot.l.
    shelter space.

    3                Storm Category 1 = 36.5% July, 30.4% November
    Storm Category 2 = 20.2% July; 17.4% November
    Storm Category 3 =  8.9% July;	7.8% November
    Storm Category 4 = 3.3% July;	2.9% November
    Storm Category 5 =  -N/A                �

    Without  public or private commercial space  available,	evacuees
    have  only  the options of (a) staying with friends  who	are  in
    safer areas within the county or (b) leaving the county for areas
    of the state expected to be less affected by the hurricane.   The
    ability of "friends" to shelter evacuees is limited.  The shelter
    capacity of those staying with friends decreases rapidly as the
    ratio of evacuees to those not affected increases.   This problem
    is depicted in Table 9.
    II-B-17

    TABLE 9
    POPULATION DISPLACEMENT RATIO
    STORM
    CATEGORY
    POPUTLATION
    DISPLACED	NOT DISPLACED         RATIO
    July    November	July    November  July  November
    94,519   2.1:1   2.4:1
    1
    187,949   223,703
    90,792
    2
    251, 168
    289,748
    27,573	28,474	9.1:1  10.2:1

    14,709	15,236	18.0:1 .19.9:1

    13,386	13,871	19.8:1  21.9:1
    264,032   302,986
    3

    4
    I
    265,355
    304,351
    5------------------------- N/A -----------------------

    It is an assumption that ratios of 1:1 or better (0.8:1, 0.6:1)
    will  enable  those seeking shelter with friends will find  them.
    Ratios of worse than 1:1 (2.1, for example), will diminish that
    likelihood  in proportion to the ratio.   Given that  assumption,
    only 48% of those evacuees from a Category 1 storm wishing to
    stay with friends will be able to do so (48%) in July and 42% in
    November).

    For Category 1 storms, those evacuees wishing to stay with
    friends (as opposed to leaving the county or staying in public
    shelters or hotels/motels) will probably find that they are able
    to do so.	The SWFRPC 1981 Evacuation Plan estimates 13% of	the
    evacuating	population	will  take  this  option.   However,	the
    opportunity	to  stay	with friends rapidly  decreases  as	storm
    intensity	increases	(forcing more people to  evacuate).	In  a
    Category	1  storm,	the percentage of persons able to stay	with
    friends	has fallen to 6.2% in July and 5.5% in November.	In  a
    Category 2 storm, the numbers are further reduced to 1.4% in July-'
    and  1.3%  in  November;  in a Category 3  storm,  .7%  and  .7%,
    respectively; Category 4 storm, ..7% in July and .5% in November;
    and in a Category 5 storm, no one will be able to stay with
    friends.

    These percentages, added to the shelter populations absorb the
    remainder  of "in county shelter" demand satisfaction.    This  is
    summarized in Table 10, below.

    TABLE 10
    SHELTER SATISFACTION WITHIN LEE COUNTY
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    PERCENT MET
    JULY          NOVEMBER
    STORM CATEGORY

    1
    2
    ... 3: .j.
    ....
    4
    3 5
    42.7	35.9
    21.6	18.7
    9:. 6.    ' : : 8,.5.~,..: />-'    ~  ;' .; 4 ,   :,-
    4.0           3.4
    ------ N/A

    T_T_l$ ."|

    If  shelter needs cannot be met within the county,  they must  be
    met outside the county.   For this reason,  a knowledge of routes
    and route capacities becomes important.

    |    Routes

    Arterial roadways form the backbone of any hurricane evacuation
    effort.   Lee  County's  roadway system provides  relatively  few
    options for evacuees coming from the coast.	Those that do exist
    are  depicted on Map 5,  "Evacuation Routes."	Identification	of
    routes  is the first step in assessing:the roadway	system.	The
    I      next  step is assessing roadway capacitie,s..	The	capacities	of
    these    roadways   have	been   developed	based   on    their
    characteristics,  tied  to	the assessment methodologies  of  the
    |Highway Capacity Manual, 1985.. These capacities are contained in
    Table  ]1,  and show that the roadways (at the 90/10 split)  vary
    from a high hourly capacity at service level D of 2,410 trips for
    1-75,  to  a  low  of 692 trips on Summerlin Road (CR  869)  from
    Colonial Boulevard (SR 884) to Daniels Road.

    An important aspect of any route is its condition.   Many  routes
    along the shore are low lying.   Their propensity to flood due to
    surge or tidal action causes their reliability to operate as a
    route to cease several hours before storm landfall.   Appendix  A
    depicts these possibilities.   In most cases, however, winds, not
    shoreline flooding,  will initially make roads unsafe for travel.
    The exceptions seem to be the Fort Myers Beach, Sanibel, Punta
    Rassa,  Shell  Point,  Blind  Pass  and  Boca  Grande	areas  for
    m landfalling storms of Category 1 or 2 strength.   This	exception
    also appears to be the case during a landfalling Category 3 storm
    for Fort Myers Beach, Sanibel, Punta Rassa and Blind Pass.

    Rainfall  flooding,  however,  may constitute a greater hazard to
    evacuation  route operation than either early shoreline  flooding
    or  early winds.   This is because roadways may flood and  become
    partially  or totally impassible early in  an  evacuation.   Surch.
    areas  have been documented for different storms and are depicted
    on  Map  6.   These  are areas that must  be  passed  before  the
    3M     presupposed onset of heavy rains, which is eight hours before eye
    landfall3

    Clearance Times

    Thiere  are  several  contributing  factors  towards   calculating
    community clearance time..  The first is the nature of the threat.
    Althoug,h there are no assurances that the County cannot be struck
    by  Category 4 and 5 storms,  the probabilities of this are  low.
    The County does, however, lie subject to storms of Category 1, 2,
    and  3 strength in decreasing probability.   With each storms  of
    increasing strength, the number of persons at risk and evacuating
    vehicles also increase.
     !
    II-B-19

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~H                                                     Alico    Rd.

    '" "    ~~           \/-? '~~(                                                             Corkscrew Rd.

    O F                                                       COLLIER    CO.
    vky c o41

    C887
    0      2 3 4 Miles
    8  ~~~-
    866~
    ~SWFRPC
    87- RNC
    Bonita
    Beoch
    Rd.
    MAP 5
    LEE COUNTY
    EVACUATION ROUTES

    TABLE 11
    EVACUATION ROUTE CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
    LEE COUNTY
    PER-
    CENT NO
    HIGIIWAY PASSING
    TYPE    ZONES
    MAXIMUM
    HRLY. FLOW/
    FLOW RATE
    (LOS D)
    DESIGN
    SPEED
    (MPII)
    LANE
    # OF   WIDTH
    LANES ' (FT.)
    TRAFFIC FLOW SPLIT
    50/50  70/30  90/10
    ROUTE

    CR 869 (Summerlin Road)
    College Pkwy to Sanibel
    Causeway
    4      12       70     Rur.Div.
    2,355
    CR 865 (Estero/Hickory/Bonita
    Matanzas Pass to Big
    Carlos Pass
    Big.Carlos Pass to
    Big. Hickory Pass
    Big Hickory Pass to
    Bonita Beach Road
    Hickory Blvd. to 1-75

    CR 765 (Burnt Store Rd.)
    SR 78 (Pine Island Road) to
    Charlotte County
    Beach Road)

    2     12      50
    100
    1,078

    1,176

    971
    1,117
    770
    897
    970

    1,058
    2       12
    60
    80
    2	10	50
    2	12	50
    100
    90
    647
    745
    806
    928
    874
    1,005

    1,263
    947   1,027
    2      12       70
    70
    760
    CR 767 (Stringfellow Blvd.)
    Bokeelia to St. James City

    CR 78 (North River Road)
    SR 31 to Hendry County
    2	12	60

    2	11.	60
    1,061

    671
    707

    497
    881

    557
    954

    604
    80
    100
    Alabama Road
    SR 82 (Immokalee Rd.) to
    Leeland Heights Blvd.

    Alico Road
    US 41 to Corkscrew Rd.

    Cape Coral Parkway
    Chiquita Blvd. to the
    Cape Coral Bridge
    2      12       60
    70      1,482
    788

    775
    982	1,064

    965	1,046
    2   l' 12
    60
    80     1,286
    4      10      50      Sub.Div.
    1,588

    %'.
    TABLE 11 (Continued
    EVACUATION ROUTE CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
    LEE COUNTY
    PER-
    CENT NO
    HIGHWAY PASSING
    TYPE    ZONES
    MAXIMUM
    [IRLY. FLOW/
    FLOW RATE TRAFFIC FLOW SPLIT
    (LOS  D)   50/50  70/30  90/10
    LANE
    # OF	WIDTH
    LANES	,(FT.)
    DESIGN
    SPEED
    (MPH)
    ROUTE
    College Parkway
    Cape Coral Bridge to US 41

    Corkscrew Road
    US 41 to Alico Road
    4	12

    2	10
    60    Sub. Div.

    60       --
    1,975
    70      1,103
    664
    827
    896
    Cypress Lake Drive
    McGregor Blvd. to US 41
    2      12       60
    100
    1,264
    766
    948  1,027
    Daniels Road
    US 41 to 1-75

    Del Prado Blvd.
    SR 78 (.Pine Island Rd.)
    to Cape Coral Parkway

    Gaspar'illa Road
    Charlotte Co. to Boca
    Grande

    I-75
    Charlotte Co. to Collier
    Co.

    US 41
    Excluding 6L
    Toro Lane to Fountain
    Interchange

    ,!
    2	12

    4	12
    6	12
    60
    100
    1,129
    752
    938  1,016
    60	Sub.Div.
    60	Sub.Div.
    --        1, 935    .
    2      12        60
    80      1,153
    769
    958  1,037
    4	12

    4	12

    6	11
    !
    70	Freeway

    70	Rur.Div.

    70	Sub.Div.
    2,410

    2,254

    2,860
    m   '  _  _    i        m  -   M    _ - M    m M

    - - -------- - - -m  - --

    TABLE 11 (Continued)
    EVACUATION ROUTE CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
    LEE COUNTY
    PER-
    CENT NO
    PASSING
    ZONES
    MAXIMUM
    HRLY. FLOW/
    FLOW RATE
    (LOS D)
    LANE
    # OF   WIDTII
    LANES ,(FT.)
    DESIGN
    SPEED
    (MPH)
    HIGHWAY
    TYPE
    TRAFFIC FLOW SPLIT
    50/50  70/30  90/10
    ROUTE
    SR 739 (Business 41)
    US 41' to SR 78 (Bayshore)
    SR 78 (Bayshore Rd.) to
    the ,Edison Bridge
    2      12       60
    100
    1,086
    774
    902   977
    4      12      60    Sub.Undiv.
    1,599
    SR 78 (Pine Island Rd./Bayshore Rd.)
    Strinigfellow Rd. to Piney
    Road	2	10	70
    Piney Rd. to Hart Rd.	4	12	70
    Hart Rd. to SR 31	2	12	70
    100

    100
    1,131
    2,036
    1,246
    602

    707
    750

    872
    Sub. Div.

    _--
    812
    955
    H SR 80. (Palm Beach Blvd.)
    I   Seaboard Ave. to New York
    New York to SR 31
    SR 31 t'o Buckingham Rd.
    Buck.ingham Rd. to Hendry Co.
    4	12
    2	12
    4	12
    2	12
    1,;744
    1,061
    2,218
    1,043
    60      Sub.Div.
    70         --
    70      Rur.Div.
    70         --
    80

    100
    881	954

    867	939
    707

    696
    SR 82;(Anderson Ave./Immokalee Rd.)
    US 4i to Ortiz Ave.	2
    Ortiz Ave. to 1-75	4
    I-75.,-to Hendry Co.	2
    1,279
    2,244
    1,015
    12	60
    12	70
    12	70
    70

    90
    895	970

    843	914
    Rur.Div.
    719

    677
    SR 884 (Colonial/Lee/Leeland Hts./Joel Blvd.)
    McGregor Blvd. to Metro
    Pkwy.	4	12	60
    Metro Pkwy. to 1-75	4	12	70
    SR 82.:;(Immokalee Rd.) to
    SR 80                          2   1 12      60

    .#:
    Sub. Div.
    Rur. Div.
    1,930
    2,380
    70
    1j482
    788
    982  1,064

    TABLE 11 (Continued_
    EVACUATION ROUTE CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
    LEE COUNTY
    MAXIMUM
    HRLY. FLOW/
    FLOW RATE
    (LOS D)
    PER-
    CENT NO
    PASSING
    ZONES
    LANE
    # OF	WIDTH
    LANES	(FT.)
    DESIGN
    SPEED
    (MPH)
    TRAFFIC FLOW SPLIT
    50/50  70/30  90/10
    HIGHWAY
    TYPE
    ROUTE
    SR 867 (McGregor Blvd.)
    US 41 to San Carlos Blvd.
    San-,Carlos Blvd. to Sum-
    merlin Rd.
    690
    854
    925
    100
    1,138
    2      11       50
    1,941
    4      12       60
    Sub.Div.
    SR 865 (Gladiolus Dr./San Carlos
    US 41 to Summerlin Rd.         2
    Summerlin Rd. to McGregor
    Blvd.                        2
    McGregor Blvd. to Estero
    Blvd.                        2
    Blvd.)
    12
    1,155

    971

    1,050
    960  1,040
    100
    770

    647

    700
    60
    806

    872
    874

    945
    100
    10      60
    12      60
    100
    ,-4

    :I

    0
    SR 31
    Char;lotte Co. to SR 80        2

    CR 869 (Summerlin Rd.)
    Colonial Blvd. to College
    Pkwy.                         4
    SR 884 (Colonial Blvd.)
    to Daniels Road               2

    Ortiz. Ave.
    SR 80 (Palm Beach Blvd.)
    to Colonial Blvd.             2

    Periwinkle Way/Sanibel-Captiva Road
    Blind Pass to the Sanibel
    Causeway                      2

    ,~
    878
    '976 '
    649
    809
    80
    10      60
    1,957
    12	60

    11	50
    Sub.Div.
    692

    860

    879
    912

    1, 198

    .971
    512

    637

    647
    638

    794

    806
    70
    100
    10      50
    100
    10      50
    _    -       _   _   _ -     _ -  -       _ -  -      _ -          _ -     _

    TABLE 11 (Continuedl
    EVACUATION ROUTE CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
    LEE COUNTY
    PER-
    CENT NO
    HIGHWAY	PASSING
    TYPE	ZONES
    MAXIMUM
    HIRLY. FLOW/
    FLOW RATE
    (LOS D)
    LANE
    # OF	WIDTH
    LANES	(FT.)
    DESIGN
    SPEED
    (MPH)
    TRAFFIC FLOW SPLIT
    50/50  70/30  90/10
    ROUTE
    Santa Barbara Blvd.
    SR 78 (Pine Island Rd.) to
    Cape Coral Parkway
    4      10      50   Sub.Div.
    1,607
    Six Mile Cypress Pkwy.
    Colonial Blvd. to US 41

    Alva Bridge
    2       12       60
    80
    1,149

    1,119
    766
    954  1,034
    2       10      50
    100
    595    741
    803
    644     698
    Cape Coral Bridge
    2       15       50
    100
    972
    517
    Edison Bridge

    Matanzas Pass Bridge
    i.n
    Sanibel Causeway
    2       12
    50
    100
    859

    1;078
    517

    770
    644

    897
    698

    970
    2      12       50
    100
    2       12
    50
    100
    NOTE:   The Peak Hour Factor was assumed to be
    was assumed to be .75 in ALL cases.
    .95 and the Driver Population Factor

    I

    I-q                                                         86      5
    AIIco  Rd.                -

    Corkscrew  Rd.

    GUL F    '         Es"ero
    .'  ,  fou ,,' "~\8,. L.,                                COLLIER    CO.

    t   C C887\0 �    2 3 4 Miles
    .-7. 865 ClT                            SWFRPC 87- RNC
    Bonii,t    /      \
    -  j                   Beach
    Rd.
    ."  !!        MAP  6
    LEE COUNTY.
    ROUTES SUBJECT TO RAINFALL FLOODING
    "/~ _ _' _l _ _ _ _ _ _1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _

    Other  factors  contributing to clearance time are the number  of
    I
    vehicles evacuating, the capacity of roadways to carry evacuees,
    and  behavioral  tendencies.   This translates into a  number  of
    hours it will take to move persons past any given point.

    The final factors are the number and distance of "tstopping"
    opportunities  offered  evacuees,   and	the  distance  to  these
    |    opportunities.   If  the total number of	stopping  opportunities
    needed are only ten miles inland, the time is much less for an
    evacuation than if they are 100 miles distant.

    I    For	certain communities within the County.,- times are
    less	than
    for	others.    This  variation  is  because  pre-landfall	flood
    conditionrs  are not as bad,	shelter locations  are  closer,	and
     better  quality  evacuation	routes  are  available.          Table	12
    summarizes pre-landfall flood conditions, Table 13 summarizes
    shelter  distances and options,  and Tabl]e 14 summarizes the time
    it  takes  to clear the most restrictive point on the  route  for
    each community for each of the slow, intermediate, and quick
    responses.   The  results of these tables compose the  evacuation
     time.

    TABLE 12
    *|~~ ~PRE-LANDFALL HAZARD CONDITIONS
    TIME TO
    COMMUNITY       CATEGORY  COASTAL FLOOD   RAINFALL

    Fine Island/	1	6.5	8
    Cape Coral	2	7.0	8
    3	8.0	8
    Sanibel/Captiva       1	10.5	8
    2	11.5	8
    3	12.5	8
    North Fort Myers/	1	-	8
    River        -	2	1.0	8
    3	2.5	8
    N.E. River/Alva       1	-	8
    2	--	8
    3	-	8
    Iona/Cypress Lake   1	2.5	8
    2	3.5	8
    3	4.5	8
    Ft. Myers Beach/	1	10.0	8
    Estero	2	l.0	8
    3	1.1.5	8
    Bonita Beach/ 1	7.0	8
    Spring Creek        2	7.5	8
    3	9.0	8
    Old Ft. Myers         1	2.5	8
    2	3.5	8
    3	4.5     -	8
    Bonita Springs        9	-	8.
    WIND
    6.0
    7.0
    9. 0
    6.0
    7.5
    9.5
    4.5
    6.0   _  _.
    8.0
    4.5
    5.5
    7.5
    ,5.0
    6.5
    8.5
    5.5
    7.0
    9.0
    5.5
    7.0
    9.0
    4.5
    5.5
    7.5
    "::'' "  ;" 9s^ {i
    ,....
    I
    I
    TT _ -?7

    I
    I
    TABLE 12 {Continuedl
    PRE-LANDFALL HAZARD CONDITIONS

    WIND                I
    TIME TO
    FLOOD   RAINFALL
    COMMUNITY
    CATEGORY COASTAL
    San Carlos Park

    Central Ft. Myers

    WS Ft. Myers

    Summerlin

    Tice

    Orange River

    North Cape Coral

    ES Fort Myers
    Page Fields/Villas
    Six Mile/Ortiz
    North Fort Myers
    2
    3
    2
    3
    2
    3
    2
    3
    2
    3
    2
    3
    2
    3
    3
    3
    3
    3
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    6.0
    3.5
    4.5
    3.5
    4.5
    3.5
    4.5

    0.5
    3.0
    4.5
    4.5
    4.5
    4.5
    1.0
    9.0
    5.5
    7.5
    5.5
    7.5
    5.5
    7.5
    5.0
    7.0
    5.0
    7.0
    7.0
    9.0
    7.5
    7.5
    7.5
    7.5
    I
    TABLE 13
    DESIGNATIONS
    SHELTER
    AND OPTIONS
    I
    PUBLIC SHELTER
    NAME
    ESTIMATED*
    TRAVEL TIME
    CATEGORY
    ZONE
    I
    1
    Boca Grandc

    Pine Islanm
    Matlacha
    Cape C-ral

    Sanibel/
    Captiva
    N. Ft.Myers,
    River

    N. River

    N.E. River,
    Alva

    Iona/Cypre:
    Lake

    Ft. Myers
    Beach/
    EsterO'

    di
    /
    Lemon Bay High School
    West Charlotte Comm. Ctr.
    Mariner High School
    .6 hr.

    .6 hr.
    I
    1

    1

    1

    1

    1

    1

    1
    Mariner High School.              .2 hr._
    Cape Coral High School
    Pelican Elementary School
    Tanglewood Elementary School    1.0 hr.
    Villas Elementary School
    Caloosa Elementary School         .3 hr.
    Caloosa Middle School
    N.Ft.Myers High School
    J.Colin EnglishE-lementary        .1 hr.
    Bayshore Elementary School
    Alva Elementary School            .5-hr.
    Alva Middle School
    Riverdale High School
    Ss  Tanglewood Elementary School      .3 hr.
    Villas Elementary School
    Orangewood Elementary School
    Tanglewood Elementary School      .5 hr.
    Villas Elementary School	;               .	<
    Bonita Middl-e School':	.   - ..   ' '  s. ..	' "
    I
    II-B-28

    TABLE 13 ICgotinuedl
    SHELTER DESIGNATIONS AND OPTIONS
    PUBLIC SHELTER
    NAME
    ESTIMATED*
    TRAVEL TIME
    CATEGORY
    ZONE
    I Bonita Bch/
    Spring
    Creek
    I      Old Fort
    Myers

    I Mobile Homes
    Bonita Middle School
    Spring Creek Elementary School
    Estero High School
    Allen Park Elementary School
    Edison Park Elementary School
    Franklin Park Elementary School
    Fort Myers High School
    Orangewood Elementary School
    (2-5)
    . 25 hr.

    .1 hr.
    .8 hr.

    .1 hr.

    .1 hr.
    .1 hr.

    .2hr.
    .2hr.

    .1 hr.

    .1 hr.

    .1 hr.
    2	All 1 Zones

    2	Bonita Springs

    2	San Carlos Park
    2	Central Fort
    Myers
    All shelters in County except:
    Cape Coral High School
    Edgewood Elementary School
    Franklin Park Elementary School
    N.Ft.Myers High School
    Pelican Elementary School
    Tanglewood Elementary School
    Villas Elementary School
    Bonita Middle School
    Spring Creek Elementary School
    Estero High School
    San Carlos Elementary School
    Franklin Park Elementary School
    Dunbar Community School
    Lee County Vocational/Technical
    San Carlos Elementary School
    Orangewood Elementary School
    Allen Park Elementary School
    Dunbar Community School
    Lee County Vocational/Technical
    Orange River Elementary School
    Tice Elementary School
    Orange River Elementary School
    Riverdale High School
    Caloosa Elementary School
    Caloosa Middle School
    Mariner High School
    Alva Elementary School
    Alva Middle School
    Bonita Middle School
    Edison Park Elementary School
    Estero High School
    Lee County Vocational/Technical
    LeHigh Elementary School
    LeHigh Middle School
    San Carlos Elementary School
    Spring Creek Elementary School
    Sunshine: Elementary School
    Tice Elementary School
    I
    I
    I
    I
    a
    2
    2
    WS Ft. Myers
    Summerlin
    2	Tice

    2	Orange River

    2	N.Cape Coral

    3	All I and 2
    Zonees
    . IA
    1I-B-29

    I
    I
    I
    TABLE 13 (Continued)
    SHELTER DESIGNATIONS AND OPTIONS
    PUBLIC SHELTER
    NAME
    ESTIMATED*
    TRAVEL TIME
    CATEGORY
    ZONE
    3	ES Ft. Myers
    3	Page Field/
    Villas

    3	Six Mile/Ortiz

    3	N.Ft.Myers
    San Carlos Elementary
    Edison Park Elementary
    Tice Elementary School
    Lee County Vocational/Technical
    Sunshine Elementary. School
    Lee County Vocatio.nal/Technical
    Tice Elementary School
    Edison Park Elementary
    Alva Elementary School
    Alva Middle School
    .2 hr.

    .25 hr.

    .8 hr.
    *Time it takes for a car traveling 30 mph to travel from the
    furthest  point  in the zone to the nearest shelter  to  the
    zone.

     A  constricting  point  from Table 14 may represent  an  u].timate
    constricting point for more than 1 zone.  That being the case, it
    may  be expected that these times will become  cumulative.   This
    creates  a	"greatest time to clear" for the county as  a  whole.
     Table  15	depicts the "greatest time to clear"  calculation  for
    each category storm.

    TABLE 15
    ULTIMATE CONSTRICTING ROUTE
    I
    I
    I
    I
    JULY	NOVEMBER
    INTER-	INTER-
    SLOW  MEDIATE  QUICK  SLOW	MEDIATE  QUICK
    CONSTRICTING
    POINT
    I
    CATEGORY
    1     SR 78 GW)
    13.7   11.0
    10.2    15.5
    12.5
    11.5_
    I
    2	SR 78 (W)

    3	SR 78 (W)
    24.2	19.4

    24.2	19.4
    18.0   27.0   21.8
    20.1
    18.0    27.0    21.8      20.1
    I
    I
    I
    I
    N
    J
    I
    Clearly, route constriction becomes a concern when it is unevenly
    distributed between different parts of the County.   The relative
    isolation  of the Sanibel and Fort Myers Beach shoreline and	the
    limited  routes available limits evacuation capacity causing	the
    large  times.   The  possibility exists	that  increased  traffic
    control can better distribute loadings.	If that is the case, the
    :  ultimate  constricting  points  move  to the sum  of  the	routes
    exiting the County.   Table 16 depicts the times that may	occur,
    given different routing scenarios.

     Thle  last factor to be incorporated into calculating  the	County
    clearance	time  is	the	response of potential  evacuees	to  all.
    evacuation	order.	The	original  '1981-82  Regional' Rurricahne
    Evacuation Plan discussed this topic on page 125,  and  concluded
    II-B-30

    --- -- - - -  - -- - - - m - - m

    TABLE 14
    TIME TO CLEAR
    JUllLY_
    INTER-
    SLOW  MEDIATE
    NOVEMBER
    INTER-
    QIJICK  SLOW  MEDIATE
    CATEGORY
    ZONE     RESTRICTING
    POINT
    TO COUNTY
    LINE
    QUICK
    1    Pine  Island/
    Ma t 1 a c h a
    Matlachla Bridge
    6.4

    13.7

    13.3
    3.5

    .8
    4.5
    4.7

    9.7

    7.6

    1.3
    3.6

    1.2

    2.2

    1.3
    1.3
    2.4
    0.5
    10.5
    0.5

    0,8

    0.2
    4.3
    5.2

    ]1.0

    10.7
    3.3

    .8
    3.8
    4.5

    7.8

    6.1

    1.2
    2.9

    1.1

    2.0

    1.1
    1.2
    2.3
    0.4
    8.4
    0.4

    0.7

    0.2
    3.6
    4.8
    7.3    5.8
    5.4

    11.5

    10.8
    3.4

    .9
    4.1
    5.1

    9.0

    6.8

    1.3
    3.2

    1. 1

    2.1

    1.2
    1.4
    2.4
    0.6
    8.6
    0.4

    0.8

    0.2
    5.0
    1.0

    -.6

    1.6
    0.5

    0.3
    0.2
    1.0

    1.2

    1.3

    0.4
    1.1

    0.8

    0.5

    0.6
    0.5
    0.5
    0.4
    0.5
    0.6

    0.5

    0.5
    0.3
    .l:  Cape Coral      SR 78(W) &'llHunter
    B 1. vd.
    l	Sanibel/Captiva   Periwinkle
    .:1	N.Ft.Myers/River SR 78 (W) & Han-
    River	cock Bridge Pwky.
    1	North River	SR 78 & SR 739
    l	NE River/Alva	CR 78 & SR 80
     1	Iona/Cypress	McGregor &
    Lake	Summerlin
    1   Ft.Myers Bch./       SR 865
    Estero
    l   Bonita Beach/    Bonita Beach Rd.
    Spring Creek
    l1	Old Ft. Myers	McGregor Blvd.
    2	Bonita Springs	Bonita Beach Rd.
    10.2    15.5  12.5
    9.8
    3.3

    .8
    3.5
    4.4

    7.2

    5.6

    1.2
    2.6

    1.1

    2.0

    1.0
    1.2
    2.2
    '0.4
    7.8
    0.4

    0.7

    0.2
    3.3
    14.7	11.8
    3.7	3.5
    .9
    5.3
    5.5
    .9
    4.4
    5.2
    12.1    9.7
    9.2
    7.4
    1.4 : 1.3,
    4.3'	3.5

    1.2	1-.2

    2.3	'2.2

    2

    '2
    9

    .2.

    .,

    1;
    1

    O.

    ;.::
    & Old IJS 41
    Alico Road &
    Corkscrew Road
    SR 80 and 82

    Daniels Rd. & Alico
    Daniels Road
    SR 80 and 82
    SR 80
    SR 78 (W)
    Daniels Road &
    Alico Road
    Daniels Road
    San Carlos
    Park
    Central Ft.
    Myers
    WS Ft. Myers
    Summerlin
    Tice
    Orange River
    N. Cape Coral
    ES Ft. Myers
    1. 7
    1.5
    2.6
    0.8
    11.5
    0.5
    1.4
    1.4
    2.5
    0.6
    9. 3
    0.4
    Page Field/
    0.f8	0.8

    0.2	0.2
    6.5	5.4
    Villas
    Six Mile/Ortiz Daniels Rd.& SR82
    N.Ft. Myers      SR 78(E) :' Old 41

    TABLE 16
    COUNTY EXITING ROUTES
    TOTAL
    CATEGORY  VEIIICLES
    LEAVING CO.
    % OF TOTAL
    EVACUATING
    VEITICLES*
    TIMES
    ROUTES
    COMBINE-D CAPACITIES
    SLOW  INTER-  QUICK
    MEDIATE
    JUTLY
    SLOW  INTER-  QUICK
    MED) IATE
    NOVEM'BER
    SLOW  INTER-  QUICK
    MED IATE
    ,(a)
    48,750(J)
    64,672 (N)
    57.3        US 41(N),
    64.1     1-75(N), SR 31
    SR 80
    6,009  6,340   6,481    8.1   7.7
    7.5     10.8  10.2
    9.8
    1(b)
    US 41(N),
    1-75(S & E),
    SR 80 & 82
    6,037 6,374
    6,517
    8.1	7.6

    14.4	13.7

    14.4	13.6

    18.1	17.2
    7.5	10.7	10.1

    13.4	18.6	17.6
    9.9

    17.2

    17.2

    19.6
    2(a)    86,743(J)
    111,549(N)
    78.4
    81.3
    same as l(a)

    same as l(b)

    same as l(a)
    H
    tI
    wI
    ro
    bo
    2(b)

    3(a)
    1-3.3., 18.6
    17.5
    109,155(J)
    127,218(N)
    90;.4
    91.5
    16.&
    21.2 20.0
    3(b) :-
    same as l(b)
    18.1  17.1
    16.7    21.2  20.0
    19.5
    (a) = landfalling and crossing storms south of Lee County and paralleling storms
    (h) = landfalling  and crossing  .storms north of Lee County and paralleling storms
    '' = percent of total evacuating vehicles          for that category storm plus
    mobile home/recreational vehicles in County.
    ,   .. ..

    m - -  m                                                      - - - m _ m m _ m
    m m    m    -
    .:..,

    that seven hours would be the minimum time needed to clear a
    I  zone,  because some evacuees would dawdle more than others.  More
    recent history indicates that sudden or dramatic changes in
    hurricanes can heighten the evacuees' response into a "tquick"f
    U  evacuation, limited basically by road capacity.  Consequently, in
    evaluating   the	final  criteria  that   determines   a   slow,
    intermediate,  or	quick evacuation,  both slow and  intermediate
    zones  will have a minimum response time of seven hours;  "quick"t
    3times, however, will be limited only by roadway capacity. All of
    these factors combine into creating a countywide clearance time.
    This time will. vary depending upon th-e.routes available for out-
    of-county evacuation, the time of season,.. and whether it isa
    slow, intermediate, or quick response. table 17 summnarizes the
    m contributioD to the greatest clearance time for the County fo-r
    *  each category storm.

    The clearance time, for the County as a whole for Category .3
    storms will inczrease if out-of-county evacuation is limited soley
    to I-75 (north) or UJS 41 (north).   If more routes are  provided,
    the time may lessen. This, of course, depends upon the impact on
    U the other evacuating counties.
    II-~B-33

    TABLE 17
    TOTAL EVACUATION TIME
    CLEARANCE
    SLOW     INTER-
    MEDIATE
    TIME__
    QUIICK
    TOTAL EVACUATION TIME
    DESTINATION(1)
    WEATHER(2)
    SLOW
    INTER-
    MEDIATE
    QUICK
    CATEGORY
    13.7(J)
    15.5(N)
    11.0(J)	10.2(J)	25.8(J)	23.1(J)	22.3(J)
    12.5(N)	11.5(N)	27.6(N)	24.6(N)	23.6(N)
    1

    2
    1.6
    1]
    0.5
    13.7(J)	11.0(J)	10.2(J)	26.3(J)	23.6(J)	22.8(J)
    15.5(N)	12.5(N)	1.1.5(N)	28.1(N)	25.1(N)	24.1(N)
    1.
    1
    11. 5
    13.7(J)	11.0(J)	10.2(J)
    15.5(N)	12.5(N)	11.5(N)
    27.0(J)	24.3(J)
    28.8(N)	25.8(N)
    23.5(J)
    24.8(N)
    3
    .8
    12.5
    (1) From Table
    13 or 14, whichever is greater

    �,-
    (2)  From Table 12
    _  _  _  _  _  _ m  _  _  _ m  m  m  m   -  -   m

    PART IT - 1991 FORECASTS
    I
    Part   of	hurricane  preparedness  involves  understanding	and
    e .evaluating	the growth expected in the forthcoming	years.	This
    m  - element	discusses	short ranged growth (4 years)	the	area	may
    undergo,	and  the	facilities that are expected to be	added	to
    serve it.

     The  growth  predicted follows a single  s.traight-lined  forecast
    technique of roughly 3.9% a year or approximately a 15,6%
    increase over the 4-year period.  Applied uniformly, increases by
    I    category  and community for housing,  persons,  and vehicles  for
    1991 are depicted in Tables 18, 19, and 20. The 15.6% increase
    over  4	years  was	determined by the  Bureau  of	Economic  and
    I    Business	Research	at  the University of  Florida
    	from  history
    growth trends between 1980 and 1987.

    |    Table 18 forecasts a total of 192,975 dwelling units for 1991.

    Table 19 forecasts a total of 322,231 persons in July; and
     369,6941 in Novemiber.

    Table  20  forecasts  a total of 147,386 vehicles  in  July;  and
    168,820 in November.

    The   additional  facilities  expected	can  be  categorized	as
    "shelters" and "routes".   Regretfully,	future shelter site	and
    capacity information has not yet been exactly determined.   Route
    *      improvements, however, are better known.
    One new school a year is forecasted to be built in Lee
    m new  school  a  year equates to  approximately  2,000
    shelter  spaces-a year.   The roughly 7,956 new spaces
    the County shelter capacity by 12% during a period
    County  is  expected  to  increase demand  by  14.0%.
    summarizes the County's estimated 1991 public shelter
    by storm catesory.
    County.  A
    additional
    increas-es-
    when the
    Table 21
    capacities
    '	.'        -                      ' "  - - X  '  '	! :' '	,	.	.......... .	,,; , ;:  p
    ;'	...........	-;    . '-  i;
    I .. ..	..	*"	-	.-"~~' '.
    .  . .                      . .-
    II-B-35

    TABLE 18
    LEE COUNTY HOUSING ESTIMATES FOR 1991
    Hotel-
    Motel
    Mobile  Recreational
    flome    Vehicle
    Multi-Family
    Resident i al
    Single-Family

    t cagory
    Total.
    Condo
    I)uplex
    Apartment
    Zolie
    . 192
    4,217
    3,485
    2,927
    27
    7,090
    6,597
    2,333
    526
    I0
    1,392
    0
    806
    1041
    549
    0
    1.06
    0
    180
    608
    1,909
    80
    344
    62
    1,463
    89
    71-6
    928
    30,028
    12,502
    15, 144
    8,288
    22,966
    19,751
    3,887
    6,023
    0
    3,631
    346

    0
    1,296
    1,993
    4,397
    1.81
    0
    0
    624
    110
    1, 921
    170
    1,141
    746
    190
    1,466
    547
    1.5,264
    6,038
    9,033
    4,186
    8,371
    4., 612
    860
    3, 144
    9
    4,292
    614
    377
    2,1.61
    3,757
    1,9o36
    128
    171
    R Boca Grande
    Pitne Islanud/C ape Coral

    1        San   113(l /Caplt  .i va
    I North For-t Myers/ 1?ivez-
    1    North E'ast Rivpr/Alva
    1 ~.   lona/Cypress Lake
    1 For-t Myers Bcach/Estero
    B Bonita Bench/Spring Creek
    1        Old Fort Myers
    �--                                                    - ---------------------�----�- -�
    2,957
    5,451   119,517
    .13,445     11,844
    6,368
    27,394
    FLOOD ZONE' I
    52,058
    TO'I'ALS
    9,147
    4,056
    7,
    11.9
    3,343
    6,025
    7,985
    871
    8,243
    179
    0
    2,274
    0
    777
    2,898
    7
    310
    1, 199
    163
    718
    16
    3,029
    283
    . I 0

    .618
    197
    240
    0
    0
    985
    0
    0
    1,064
    282
    58
    177
    0
    312
    1.1
    8
    0
    0
    2      Bonita Springs
    2	.San Carlos Par-k
    2	--entral Fort Myers
    2     W.S. Fort Myers
    2        Summerlin
    2	.    Tice
    2	Orange River
    2    :North Cape Coral
    1,557
    99
    437
    1,469
    280
    696
    422
    1,744
    2,318
    0
    54
    348
    340
    202
    271
    8
    3,415
    3,496
    3,459
    1,510
    302
    3,788
    171
    4,499
    H
    H

    rr
    ICw

    � ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- ----- -- - -- --- -- - --�- --- - -- -- --�-
    TOTALS     FLOOD ZONE 2        20,640          6,704     3,541         6,445        6,026.   2,486	947    46,789

    3	E.S. Fort Myers	822	0	0	0	23	0	0	845
    3	Page Field/Villas	1,762	0	0	94	170	16	665	2,707
    3	Six Mile/Ortiz	424	7	0	388	0	0	0	819
    3	North Fort Myers	2,176	9,356	1,546	80	0	0	561	13,719

    TOTALS     FLOOD ZONE 3	5,184	9,363	1,546	562	193	16	1,226	18,090

    4	Lehigh North	434	323	0	72	57	0	0	886
    4	Gateway	9	12	0	0	0	0	0	21
    4	Corkscrew	103	0	0	0	57	0	0	1.60
    - ------          - ---�------------------------         ��            --.
    TOTAitS     FLOOD ZONE 4         546  it        335         0            72         114           0         0      1;067

    5	Lehigh South
    5	East County
    7,506
    6
    373
    0
    1,474
    0
    0
    0
    143
    0
    0
    0
    0

    0
    5,516
    6
    _-- _-------_-_-------
    -   IWLSM   Fio  7(LS -               W      - aft     M   ( O     g73M     M    M           M       3 -7,m m

    TABLE 19
    LEE COUNTY POPULATION ESTIMATE FOR 1991

    Storm	Population Estimates
    aI    Category          Zone	July	November

    1.         Boca Grande	1,750	1,856
    3I~ ~ Pine Island/Matlacha	9,817	11,115
    Cape Coral	41,854	47,389
    Sanibel/Captiva	21,764	23,946
    !|~ ~ North Fort Myers/River	2!2,612	23,790
    North River	7,538	7,930
    N.E. River/Alva	13,535	16,021
    Iona/Cypress Lake	36,145	42,564
    I          �    Fort Myers Beach/Estero	25,859	32,291
    Bonita Beach/Spring Creek	5,741	6,721
    Old Fort Myers	1.1,530	12,262
    I|    ~ Mobile Homes & Recreational	19,122	34,533
    Vehicles, not otherwise
    included in the above flood
    prone areas (Category 2-5 Areas)

    TOTAL AREA 1	217,267	260,418

    |        2           Bonita Springs	13,136	16,077
    San Carlos Park	9,057	9,191
    Central Fort Myers	13,455	14,521
    I5~~ ~         W.S. Fort Myers	5,201	6,526
    Summerlin	8,777	10,321
    Tice	14,991	16,308
    Orange River                 963	1,438
    I                  North Cape Coral	15,954	17,526
    Mobile Homes & Recreational-	10,675	18,979
    Vehicles, not otherwise
    I              included in the above flood
    prone areas (Category 3-5 Areas)                            _ _

    NEW EVACUEES	73,087	76,354
    I)~~ ~          TOTALS 1 - 2	290,354	336,772

    23      E.S. Fort Myers	1,942	1,949
    I9~~ Paige Field/Villas	5,366	5,580
    Six Mile/Ortiz	1,646	1,726
    North Fort Myers	16;250	24,426
    U       -     Mobile Homes & Recreational          345            604
    Vehicles, not otherwise
    included in the above flood
    3|  ~      prone areas (Category '4-5 Areas)

    NEW EVACUEES	]4,874	15,306
    I|~~ ~TOTALS 1 - 3	305,228	352,078

    :'.% . -                         .   .. . . : -    ....................................... .
    II-B-37

    I
    I
    TABLE 19 (Continuedl
    LEE COUNTY POPULATION ESTIMATE FOR 1991

    Storm	Population Estimates
    Category          Zone	July	November

    4        Lehigh North	1,534	1,814
    GaLeway	33	44
    Corkscrew	310	328
    Mobile Homes & Recreational           0              0
    Vehicles, not otherwise
    inclu(led in the above flood        .'
    prone areas (Category 5 Area)

    NEW EVACUEES              1,532          1,582
    TOTALS 1 - 4	306,760	353,660

    5        Lehigh South	15,457	16,020
    East County                    14             14

    NEW EVACUEES	15,471	16,034
    TOTALS 1 - 5	322,231	369,694

    TABLE 20
    LEE COUNTY VEHICLE ESTIMATES FOR EVACUATION
    I
    MOBILE HOME &
    JULY   REC. VEHICLES
    MOBILE HOME &
    REC. VEHICLES
    CATEGORY
    ZONE
    NOVEMBER
    I
    1	Boca Grande
    1	Pine Island/
    Matlacha
    1	Cape Coral
    1	Sanibel/Captiva
    I	N.Ft.Myers/River
    1.	North River
    1	Alva/North River
    '    1	Iona/Cypress Lake
    1	Fort Myers Beach/
    Estero
    : '1    Bonita Beach/
    Spring Creek
    1    Old Fort Myers
    (    0)
    (2,684)

    (
    0)
    ( 352)
    (    0)
    ( 178)
    (1,255)
    (2,136)
    (1,707)

    (	94)

    (	81)
    851
    5,607

    21,599
    10,962
    10,903
    3,635
    7,289
    19,427
    14,619

    3,067

    5,620
    (    7)
    (3,259)

    (    0)
    ( 649)
    4) -
    ( 311)
    (2,314)
    (3,917)
    (3,400)

    ( 180)

    ( 141)
    803
    4,487

    19,130
    9,969
    10,363
    3,455
    6,179
    16,532
    11,772

    2,630

    5,285
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
     2
    2
    2
    2
    2
    2
    2
    2
    .Bonita Springs
    San Carlos Park
    Central Ft. Myers
    W.S. Fort Myers
    Summerlin
    Tice
    Orange River
    North Cape Coral.
    5,980
    4,150
    6,168
    2,378
    4,015
    6,867
    436
    7,312
    (1,153)
    (   47)
    ( 218)
    ( 758)
    ( 193)
    ( 365)
    ( 249)
    (.. 826)
    7,274
    4,213
    6,653
    2,997 .
    4,71.5
    7,466
    647
    8, 031
    (2,235)
    (   82)
    ( 383)
    (1,355)
    ( 371)
    ( 657)
    ( 459)
    ( 1 ,44  ) 3 .,
    I
    II-B-38

    TABLE 20 (Continued)
    LEE COUNTY VEHICLE ESTIMATES FOR EVACUATION

    MOBILE HOME &	MOBILE HOME &
    CATEGORY    ZONE          JULY   REC. VEHICLES  NOVEMBER	REC. VEHICLES

    3	E.S. Fort Myers       890	(	0)        893	(	0)
    3	Page Field/Villas  2,459	(	0)      2,638	(	0)
    3	Six Mile/Ortiz        754	(	3)        791	(	6)
    3	North Fort Myers   7,420	(4-,703)    11,133	(8,353)

    4	Lehigh North	703	(  15')	831	(	266)
    4	Gateway	16	(.	6)	20	(	10)
    4	Corkscrew	142	(	0)	150	(	0)

    5	Lehigh South        7,085	(	0)      7,343	(	0)
    5	East County              6	(	0)          6	(	0)

    147,386	(17,165)   168,820	(29,797)

    TABLE 21
    1991 PUBLIC SHELTER CAPACITY*

    % Population
    Storm	Shelter  Evacuating Population	__ Sheltered
    Category	Space     July	November	July	November

    1	67,626	217,267	260,418	31.1	26.0

    2	53,326	290,254	336,772	18.4	15.8

    3	31,536	305,228	352,078	10.3	9.0

    4	16,676	306,760	353,660	5.4	4.7

    5	16,676	322,231	269,694	5.2	4.5

    *    Assumes new shelter space is built at or above Category
    5 flood level.

    Route  improvements  for the next 4  years  indicate  substantial
    improvements  will be made to routes .exiting the Category 1 zone.
    Using the 1988-1992 TIP of the Fort Myers/Lee County Metropolitan
    Plann ing  Organization  as a  guide,  the  following  signif.icant
    improvements are forecasted:

    (a)  Extending  Metro Parkway from SR 884 (Colonial) to Six  Mile
    Parkway.

    (b)  Adding two lanes on CR 865 (Bonita Beach Road) from  Hickory
    Boulevard to 1-75.
    c)	n o....	'	.	.....:... "
    (c)  Adding	two  lanes  on	Cypress	Lake  Drive	from  McGregor
    Boul.evard to l!S 41.
    -r   ^

    I
    I
    (d) Adding two lanes on Daniels Road from UJS 41 to 1-75.
    I
    (e) Extending Daniels Road (4 lanes) from Airport Entrance,
    SR 82.
    to
    (f) Adding two lanes on College Parkway from the Bridge to US
    41.

    (g)  Adding  two lanes on Summerlin Road from Gladiolus to SR 884
    (Colonial).

    (h)  Adding  two  lanes on Del Prado Boulevard  from  Cape  Coral
    Parkway to Coralwood Drive.

    (i)  Extending SR 884 (Colonial Boulevard) from 1-75 to SR 82.

    (j) Adding two lanes on SR 80 from New York Avenue to SR 31.

    (k)  Replace  the  existing 2 lane SR 739 (Old US  41)  including
    Bridge with a six-lane road to US 41.

    (1)  Adding  a  center tuning lane on San Carlos  Boulevard  from
    Summerlin Road to Hurricane Pass.

    Even though the exact capacities of these new improvements cannot
    be  calculated at this time,  an estimate can be made.   Table 22
    provides  a  revision  of the previously  provided  Table  ll  to
    represent 1991 conditions.

    TABLE 22
    REVISED CAPACITIES
    I
    I

    I

    I

    I

    I

    I
    Old
    Capacity

    None
    (Quick) None
    1,005 (Quick)

    1,027 (Quick)
    1,016 (Quick)
    None
    1,975
    1.,975
    I,'935

    (Quick) None
    954 (Quick)
    New
    Capacity
    Route
    Metro Parkway from SR 884 to Daniels Road
    Metro Pkwy. from Daniels Rd. to Six Mile Pkwy
    CR 865 (Bonita Beach Rd.) from Hickory
    Boulevard to 1-75
    Cypress Lake Drive from McGregor to US 41
    Dani.els Road from UIS 41 to 1-75
    D'aniels Rd. Ext. from Airport entrance to. SR 82
    College Parkway from Bridge to UIS 41,
    Summerlin fromn Gladiolus to Colonial
    Del Prado Blvd. from Cape Coral Pkwy. to
    Coralwood Dr.
    Extend Colonial Blvd. from 1-75 to SR 82
    SR 80 from New York Avenue to SR 31
    SR 739 (Old IlS 41) including Bridge to US 41
    San Carlos Bl,vd. from Summerlin Rd. to
    Rurricane Pass
    1,975
    1,021
    1,898

    1,935
    2,169
    2,386
    2,903
    2,906
    2,903

    1,017
    1,876
    2 792
    1,029       945 (Quick)
    (Quick)

    As'uming  thalt  these-" improvements a're  in ' place,' r'etw"  shelter'
    satisfaction  capacities (Table 10),  tiime to clear  (Table  14),

    II-B-40                                     I

    ultimate constricting route (Table 15), exiting route assessments
    (Table 16), and total evacuation time calculations (Table 17) can
    be made.

    m Shelter capacities for a Category 1. storm do not improve with the
    facilities projected because growth is out-stripping the capacity
     added.	Since  the  methodology used was a single  straight-line
    process,	the only factors changing were the population (up  14%)
    and  shelter space (up 12%).   As a result,  shelter satisfaction
    within the County will demonstrate a.decline for a Category 1
    storm  and  a slight increase for Category 2 and  higher  storms.
    m
    Table 23 depicts this change...

    TABLE 23
    SHELTER SATISFACTION, 1991

    Percent Met
    Category	July      November

    1	41.6	35.1
    2	21.7	18.7
    *I~ ~~ ~3	11.2	9.9
    4	6.3	5.4
    35	(1	<1

    The decline for a Category 1 storm can only worsen evacuation and
    clearance    times   unless   comparable   out-of-county    route
    improvements are made.   Using the improvements listed, there are
    route  improvements  forecasted that improve  in-county  movement
    capacities.   The  most  effective improvements are Bonita  Beach
    Road, San Carlos Boulevard, Summerlin and Daniels Road.  Table 24
     depicts these changes.

    I
    II-B-41

    TABLE 24
    TIME TO CLEAR_ 1991
    ____JULY              _	NOVEMBE]
    INTER-	INTER-
    SLOW  MEDIATE  QUICK  SLOW	MEDIATE
    R
    CATEGORY
    ZONE
    RESTRICTING
    POINT
    QUICK
    1
    Pine Island/
    Ma t I acha
    Matlacha Bridge
    7.4
    6.0
    5.5
    8.4    6.8
    6.2

    13.3

    12.5
    4.0

    1.0
    4.7
    5.1

    9.5

    3.8

    1.5
    2.6

    1.3

    2.3

    0. 9
    1.2
    2.6
    0.3
    9.9
    0.3

    0.6

    0.1
    5.8
    1  Cape Coral      SR 78(W) & Hunter
    Blvd.
    1	Sanibel/Captiva   Periwinkle
    1	N.Ft.Myers/River SR 78 (W) & flan-
    River	cock Bridge Pwky.
    I	North River	SR 78 & SR 739
    1.	NE River/Alva	CR 78 & SR 80
    1-	Iona/Cypress	McGregor &
    ~"   Lake	Summerlin
    1   Ft.Myers Bch./       SR 865
    Estero
    1-  Bonita Beach/    Bonita Beach Rd.
    Spring Creek
    1	!Old Ft. Myers	McGregor Blvd.
    2	Bonita Springs	Bonita Beach Rd.
    15.8     12.7
    11.8    17.9  14.4
    15.4
    4.1

    1.0
    5.2
    4.6

    10.4

    3.4

    1.5
    -2.3

    1.4

    2.4

    0.8
    1.0
    2.6
    0.2
    12.1
    0.3

    0.6

    0.1
    5.0
    12.4
    3.9

    1. 0
    4.3
    4.4

    8.3

    3.4

    1.4
    2.2

    1.3

    2.2

    0.8
    1.0
    2.5
    0.2
    9.7
    0.3

    0.6

    0.1
    4.2
    11.3
    3.8

    1.0
    4.0
    4.3
    16.9	13.6
    4.3	4.1
    1.0
    6.1
    5.4
    1. 0
    5.1
    5.2
    7.7    12.9  10.3
    H
    H
    I
    rI
    3.4

    1.4
    2.1

    1.3

    2.2

    0.7
    1. 0
    2.4
    0.2
    9.0
    0.3

    0.6

    0.1
    3.8
    3.8	- 3.8

    1.6	1.5
    2.8	2:,6

    1.4	1.3

    2.6	2.4
    & Old US 41
    Alico Road &
    Corkscrew Road
    SR 80 and 82

    Daniels Rd. & Alico
    Daniels Road
    SR 80 and 82
    SR 80
    SR 78 (W)
    Daniels Road &
    Alico Road
    Daniels ?oad

    Daniels Rd.& SR82
    SR 78(E) & Old,41
    2

    2

    2
    2
    9
    2
    2
    3

    3.

    3!
    3
    San Carlos
    Park
    Central Ft.
    Myers
    WS Ft. Myers
    Summ'erlin
    Tice
    Orange River
    N. Cape Coral
    ES Ft. Myers

    Page Field/
    Villas
    Six Mile/Ortiz
    N.Ft. Myers
    0.9
    1.2
    2.7
    0.3
    10. 1
    0.3
    1. 0
    1.2
    2.9
    0.3
    13.3
    0.3
    0.6	'0.6

    0.2	0.1
    7.5	6.3
    _  _   _   _   _   _   _   _  _   _   _   _ _                  -   - _ -  m

    TABLE 25
    ULTIMATE CONSTRICTING ROUTE_ 1991

    INTER-
    SLOW MEDIATE QUITCK
    NOVEMBERf
    INTEl -
    SLOW  MEDIATE  QUICK
    CONSTRICTING
    POTNT
    CATEGORY
    13.5
    SR 78 (w)
    15.8
    12.7    11.8    17.9   14.4
    SR 78 (w)

    SR 78 (W)
    27.9
    22.4   i20.8
    2

    3
    31.2	24.5

    31.2	24.5
    23.4

    23;4
    27.9     22.4  ,20.8
    RegreUtfull. y,  none of the out-of-county routes have  improvements
    slat.ed.	Consequently,   traffic  growth combined with a  reduced
    ability	to provide shelter during a Category 1 increased out-of-
    county times.	This is depicted in Table 26.

    Unfortunately,	the only Category 1 zone which has a reduction in
    evacuation  times is the Bonita Beach/Spring  Creek  zone.   This
    reduction will occur because of four-laning Bonita Beach Road.
    Other  zone	evacuation times in the Category 1 area  would  have
    increased	more   if   it  had	not	been  for   the   predicted
    transportation  improvements.	One	transportation  improvement
    which should be completed as soon as possible is the 4-laning of
    SR  78 west of US 41.   If SR 78 was four-laned,  the Cape  Coral
    clearance  times  for November 1991 (the highest in  the  County)
    would be reduced from 17.9 hours to 8.2 hours during a Category 1
    slow response.   Consequently, the total evacuation time would be
    reduced from 30 hours to 20.3 hours for Cape Coral.

    Table 27 indicates that the total County evacuation time for 1991
    can be expected to increase by approximately 2.5 hours.	This can
    be  prevented  through more shelters in the County and	improving
    critical evacu-ation routes such as SR 78 west of US 41 ....
    I

    I
    II-B-43

    TABLE 26
    COI_NTY EXITING ROUTES, 1991
    TOTAL
    CATEGORY  VEIICI,ES
    LEAVING CO.
    % OF TOTAL
    EVACUATING
    VEIIICLES*
    TIPMES
    ROUTES
    COMBINED CAPACITIES
    SLOW INTER- OUICK
    MEDIATE
    JULY
    NOVEMBER
    SI,OW IN'T'ER -
    fMED
    IATE
    QUICK   SLOW  TNTE--  QUIJTCK
    MEDIATE
    1(a)
    57,979(J)
    77,009(N)
    58.4	US 41(N),
    6,1.9	--75(N), SR
    31
    SR 80
    6,009  6,340   6,481    9.6   9.].
    8.9     12.8  12.1
    11.9
    1 (b)
    UJS 41(N),
    I-75(S & E),
    SR 80 & 82
    6,037 6,374
    6,51.7    9.6   9.1.
    8.9       .   12. 1
    11.8
    2(a)    103,964(J)
    124,917(N)
    78.3
    81.3
    samle as l(a)
    17.3 16.4
    16.0    20.8  19.7    19.3
    2(b)

    3(a)   123,959(J)
    '. 144,832(N)

    3(b)

    (a) = landfall:
    (b' = landfall:
    . = percent
    mobile
    same as l(b)
    1.0 .0	20.7

    19. 1-:	24.1

    19.0  . 24.0
    17.2 16.3

    20.6  19.6
    19.6

    22.8

    22.7
    19.2

    22.3

    22.2
    88.8
    90.1
    same as l(a)
    same as l(b)
    20.5 19.4
    ing
    ing
    and crossing storms south of Lee County and paralleling storms
    and crossing storms north of Lee County ancl paralleling st.orms
    of total evacuating vehicles for that category storm plus
    home/recreational vehicles in County.
    -                m/I m  m  m  m   / m -  -                                                             I       -

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    TABLE 27
    TOTAL EVACUATION TIME. 1991
    -TOTAL EVACUIATION TIME
    SiLOWi    INTER--   QIJICK
    MEDITA'PE
    CLEARANCE
    SLOW     INTER-
    MEDIATE
    TIME___
    QUICK
    WEATHER(2)
    DESTINATION(1)
    CATEGORY
    23. 9(J)
    25.4(N)
    12.7(J)	11.8(J)	27.9(.J)	24.8(J)
    14.4(N)	13.3(N)	30.0(N)	26.5(N)
    10.5
    1.5. 8(J)
    17. o(N)
    I
    28.4(J)	25.3(J)	24.4(J)
    30.5(N)	27.0(N)	25.9(N)
    15.8(J)	12.7(J)	11.8(J)
    17.9(N)	14.4(N)	13.3(N)
    11. 5
    1.1
    2
    26.0(J)	25.1(J)
    27.7(N)	26.6(N)
    12-7()	1l1..8(J)	29.1.(J)
    14.4(N)	13.3(N)	31.2(N)
    1587(J)
    17. 9(N)
    12.5
    .8
    (1)	From Tablef 1.3 or 14, whichever is greater

    (2)	From Table-12

    ,:r

    APPENDIX A
    LANDFALLING
    PRE-EYE LANDFALI. HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 1
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)

    5.5
    5.5
    6
    6
    5.5
    5
    4.5
    5
    4.5
    4.5
    4
    7
    6
    6
    5.5
    6
    TOTAL
    DURATION
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HOURS
    *      GRID
    STORM              E
    POINTS

    Fort Myers Beach
    bt. Myers Beach Bridge
    ;anibel
    I Punta Rassa
    qhell Point
    I  ape Coral Parkway
    ilarney Point
    lona
    'iver
    fTew Bridge
    East Fort Myers
    lind Pass
    'ine Island Sound
    iPine Island Center
    'latlacha
    ,oca Grande

    L,ANDFA,LING
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(1)
    TOTAL
    DURATION
    IN HOURS

    14
    13.5.
    17
    15.5
    12
    11
    9
    11.5
    7.5

    12.5
    13.5

    12
    11.5
    STORM
    TRACK
    10
    3
    10.5
    8
    6.5
    1
    0
    0
    2.5
    -1.5

    9
    4.5

    2
    7
    (75
    (35
    (75
    (75
    (70
    (30
    (30
    (25
    (65
    (25
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    (35
    (40
    (35
    (45
    (40
    (30
    (24
    (30
    (35
    (40
    (35
    (60
    (45
    (55
    (40
    (60
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    8
    7.5
    8.5
    7.5
    8
    8
    8.5
    8.5
    8.5
    7.5
    8
    7
    8.5
    7.5
    8.5
    8.5
    (70 NS)
    (70 NS)

    (45 NS)
    (70 NS)
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL, HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 2
    HOIURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    TOTAL
    DURATION
    IN
    HOUIMS
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS
    HOIrS BEFORE
    EYE IANDFALL-
    FWOODING(1)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    STORM
    TRACK __
    F 'ort Myers Beach
    Ft. Myers Beach Bridge
    anibel
    I 'unta Rassa
     Sell'  Point
    ape Cora] Parkway
    arney Point
    Iona
    River
    Tew Bridge
    Q,ast Fort Myers
    Blind Pass
    'ine Island Sound
    'ine Island Center
     Mat lacha
    qoca Gr.ande

    I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~   :'.
    11
    4.5
    11.5
    9
    7
    2
    1
    1.5
    3.5
    - .5

    10
    5.5
    1.5
    3
    (75 NS)
    (50 NS)
    (75 NS)
    (75 NS)
    (65 NS)
    (40 NS)
    (35 NS)
    (40 NS)
    (70 NS)
    (25 NS)
    15
    14.5
    15
    18
    16
    12
    1.2
    11.5
    1.2.5
    10.4

    13.5
    14.5
    8.5
    13
    11.5
    7
    7
    7.5
    7
    7
    6.5
    6
    6.5
    5.5
    5.5
    5
    8
    7
    7
    6.5
    7
    '^, " : bt'
    (40 NS)	10
    (60 NS)	8
    (45 NS)	10
    (40 NS)	.0
    (40 NS)	10.5
    (40 NS)	10
    (40 NS)	10
    (45 NS)	9.5
    (40 NS)	9.5
    (40 NS)	10
    (30 NS)	1.0
    (65 NS)	9
    (45 NS)	10.5
    (45 NS)	10.5
    (45 NS)	10
    (60  , . NS	0.,5 .,
    (75
    (75
    (40
    (50

    (75
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)

    APPENDIX A
    LANDFALLING
    I
    TOTAL
    DURATT
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HOURS
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL IIAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 3
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(1)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    (75
    (55
    (75
    (75
    (75
    (60
    (45
    (50
    (70
    (35
    (25
    (75
    (75
    (40
    (60
    (70
    15.5
    16  ,;.
    16.5
    19
    20
    13
    12.5
    13
    13.5
    13
    4.5
    14
    15
    13
    13.5
    12
    (45
    (60
    (45
    (45
    (60
    (60
    (40
    (60
    (40
    (45
    (35
    (60
    (55
    (65
    (45
    (75
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    13
    12
    13.5
    13.5
    12.5
    12.5
    13
    12.5
    13
    13
    13
    13.5
    14.5
    12.5
    13.5
    13
    Fort Myers Beach
    Ft. Myers Beach Bridge
    Sanibel
    Punta Rassa
    Shell Point
    Cape Coral Parkway
    llarney Point
    Iona
    River
    New Bridge
    East Fort Myers
    Blind Pass
    Pine Island Sound
    Pine Island Center
    Matlacha
    Boca Grande

    LANDFALLING
    11.5
    6
    12.5
    10
    8
    4
    2.5
    3
    4.5
    1
    -1
    1].1
    .5
    6
    3
    4.5
    8.5
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)

    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS
    )
    .9-
    9
    9.5
    9
    9
    8.5
    8
    8.5
    7.5
    7.5
    7
    10
    9
    9
    8.5
    9
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL TIAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 4

    TOTALl
    DURATION
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HOURS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    GRID
    STORFM
    POINTS

    Fort Myers Beach
    Ft. Myers Beach Bridge
    Samibe]
    Punta Rassa
    Shell Point
    Cape Coral]. Parkway
    Harney Point
    Iona
    River
    New Bridge
    East Fort Myers
    Blind Pass
    Pine Islmad Sound
    Pine Island Center
    Matlacha
    Boca Grande
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(1)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOIRS
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    12
    7
    13
    10.5
    9
    5
    4
    4
    5
    3
    0
    11
    6.5
    4
    5.5
    9
    (75
    (75
    (75
    (75
    (75
    (75
    (60
    (55
    (70
    (45
    (30
    (75
    (75
    (45
    (65
    (75
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    16
    16
    17
    19.5
    18
    14
    13
    14
    14
    12
    7
    14.5
    15.5
    14
    14.5
    12
    10.5
    10.5
    11
    10.5
    1.0
    10
    9.5
    10
    9
    9
    9
    11.5
    10.5 :
    10.5
    10
    10
    (45
    (60
    (50
    (45
    (40
    (55
    (45
    (60
    (40
    (40
    (50
    (60
    (55
    (60
    (50
    (55
    15
    14
    -15
    15
    15
    14.5
    15
    14
    14.5
    14.5
    14
    15
    15
    14.5
    15
    1.5.5
    I

    I

    I

    I

    I
    ..-'         ''.           .                   � ,:'  ; .'%,  ' '    .    .  :,          ,    '.

    I
    2

    APPENDIX A
    LANDFALLING
    PRE--EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 5
    TOTAL
    DURATION
    IN
    HOURS

    13.5
    13
    13.5
    12.5
    13.5
    13.5
    12.5
    13
    13
    13.5
    13
    13
    12.5
    13.5
    13.5
    14
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)

    9.5.
    9.5
    10
    10
    9.5
    9
    9
    9
    8.5
    8.5
    8
    10.5
    10
    9.5
    9
    9.5
    GRID	HIOURS BEFORE
    I      STORM	EYE LANDFALL-
    POINTS	FLOODING (1)

    | Fort Myers Beach	12
    Ft. Myers Beach Bridge	6.5
    3anibel	12.5
     unta Rassa	10
    I  Shell Point	8.5
    ,ape Coral Parkway	4
    farney Point	3
     Iona	4.5
    River	5
    qew Bridge	1.5
    E bast Fort Myers	-- .5
    Blind Pass	10.5
    'ine Island Sound	6
    P ine Islald Center	4
    Matlacha	5
    3oca Grande	8.5

    PARALLEL
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    STORM
    TRACK

    (40 NS)
    (45 NS)
    (45 .NS)
    (60 NS)
    (45 NS)
    (45 NS)
    (60 NS)
    (45 NS)
    (45 NS)
    (45 NS)
    (45 NS)
    (60 NS)
    (60 NS)
    (55 NS)
    (45 NS)
    (60 NS)
    (75 NS)
    (65 NS)
    (75 NS)
    (75 NS)
    (70 NS)
    (50 NS)
    (50 NS)
    (55 NS)
    (75 NS)
    (45 NS)
    (35 NS)
    (75 NS)
    (75 NS)
    (60 NS)
    (65 NS)
    (75 NS)
    16, .
    15-5 ':,
    16
    19
    17.5
    14
    13
    13.5
    14
    10.5
    4.5
    13.5
    15
    13
    14
    11.5
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL thAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 1
    TOTAL
    DURATION
    STOII	IN
    T%ACIL	HOURS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    ITOImS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODINC(I)
    TOTAL
    DURATION
    IN HOURS:
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS
    STORF
    TRACK
     PFort Myers Beach
    Ft. Myers Beach Bridge
    anibel
    funta Rassa
    *Shell Point
    'ape Coral Parkway
    " {arney Point
    mIona
    qiver
    ,ew Bridge
    I ist Fort Myers
    Blind Pass
    ine Island Sound
    'ine Island Center
    o Matlacha
    oca Grande
    13
    12
    13.5
    13
    12

    9
    2
    0
    2.5
    I
    0

    -3
    (60
    (15
    (60
    (15
    (15
    wS)
    WS)
    WS
    )
    ws
    )
    IwS
    )
    WS)
    5
    5
    4.5
    4.5
    4.5
    5
    5
    4.5
    4.5
    4
    4
    4
    4
    4
    4
    2.5
    ( o S)
    (15 WS)
    ( 0 S)
    ( 0 S)
    ( a S)
    (15 ES)
    (15 ES)
    (.O  S)
    (15 ES)
    (15 ES)
    (15 ES)
    ( 0 S)
    ( (	s)
    ( 0	S)
    ( 0	S)
    (15 WS).
    8.5
    9
    8.5
    8.5
    8.5
    9
    9
    8.5
    9
    8.5
    8.5
    8.5
    8
    8
    8
    8.5
    ( 0 S)
    0
    -1.5

    -2
    -2.-
    5
    (60 WS)
    (15 ES)

    (15 WS)
    (1.5 ES.)
    11.5
    8
    10
    .. 3
    .I.. i

    APPENDIX A
    PARALLEL
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 2
    lOUIRS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    TOTAL
    DURATIC
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HOURS
    GRID
    STY)RM
    POINTS
    IIOIU'S BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING ( 1)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    (60 WS)
    (15 WS)
    (60 WS)
    (15 WS)
    (15
    IwS)
    ( 0 s)
    ( 0 S)
    ( 0 S)
    ( 0 S)
    14
    12.5
    14.5
    16
    12. 5
    10.5
    1.0
    10
    9.5

    12.5
    11.5
    10.5
    11
    10
    7 ..
    6.5
    6.5
    6.5
    6
    6
    6
    6.5
    6
    6
    6
    6
    5.5
    5.5
    5.5
    3.5
    ( 0
    (0
    (15
    (0
    (0
    ( 0
    ( 0
    (15
    (15
    (1.
    5
    (15
    (15
    (15
    (15
    (15
    (15
    S)
    S)
    WS)
    S)
    S)
    S)
    S)
    ES)
    ES)
    ES)
    ES)
    WS)
    WS)
    wS)
    ES)
    WS)
    11
    11.5
    11
    11.5
    11
    11
    11
    11
    11
    11
    11
    11
    11
    11
    11
    10.5
    Fort Myers Beach
    Ft. Myers Beach Bridge
    Sanibel
    Punta Rassa
    Shell Point
    Cape Coral Parkway
    HIarney Point
    Iona
    River
    New Bridge
    East Fort Myers
    Blind Pass
    Pine Island Sound
    Pine Island Center
    Matlacha
    Boca Grande

    PALRALLEL
    2
    .5
    2.5
    4
    .5
    -1.5
    -2
    -2
    -2.5

    .5
    --
    1.5
    -1.5
    -1
    -2
    (60
    (15
    (15
    (15
    (60
    WS)
    ES)
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    I
    I
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 3

    TOTAI. I
    DURATION
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HOURSI
    HOIRS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)

    8.5
    8
    8
    8
    GRID I
    STORMI

    I
    POINTS

    I

    Fort Myers Beach
    Ft. Myers Beach Bridge
    Sanibel
    Punta Rassa

    Shell Poi-nt
    Cape Coral Parkway
    larney Point
    Tona
    River
    New Bridge
    Elist Fort Myers
    Blind Pass
    Pine Island Sould
    Pine Island Center
    Matlacha
    Bnca Grande
    ITOURS BEFORE
    EYE LIANDFALL -
    FLOOD ING(i)
    TOTAL
    DUTRATION
    IN HOURS
    STORM
    TRACK
    S)
    S)
    WS)
    S)

    S)
    S)
    S)
    ES)
    ES)
    ES)
    ES)
    WS)
    WS)
    S)
    S)
    S)
    ,  !.�; ., _.�
    14
    13.5
    13.5
    14

    14
    13.5
    14
    14
    14
    14
    14
    14.5
    14
    14
    14
    13.5
    (60
    (15
    (60
    (15
    (415
    (30
    (15
    (0
    (0
    (0
    (0

    (60
    (15
    (15
    (15
    (60
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    ES)
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    S)
    S)
    S)
    S)

    WS)
    ws)
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    14
    13
    14.5
    3.5
    13
    12.5
    11
    10.5 '
    11
    10
    9.5

    13
    10.5
    11
    11
    9.5
    ( 0
    (0
    (15
    (
    2
    1
    2.5
    5
    1.5
    .5
    -1
    -1.5
    -1

    --
    2.5

    1
    -
    ]1.5
    -1
    -1
    -2.5
    I
    I
    I
    I
    1
    I
    ( 0
    (0
    (
    (15
    (15
    (15
    (15
    (15
    (15
    (0
    (
    (0
    8
    7.5
    7.5
    8
    7.5
    7.5
    7.5
    7.5
    7
    7
    7
    5.5
    1
    I
    I
    4

    APPENDIX A
    PARALLEL
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES -
    CATEGORY 4
    HOIJRS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)

    8.5
    8.5
    8.5
    8
    8
    8
    7.5
    8
    7.5
    7.5
    7.5
    8
    7.5
    7.5
    7
    6
    TOTAL
    DURATION
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HOTRS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(1)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    I        STOI~G R I
    D
    I ~ STORM
    POINTS
    I Fort Myers Beach
    Ft. Myers Beach Bridge
    kanibel
    E.nta Rassa
    Shell Point
    "ape Coral Parkway

    Iona
    .iver
    'ew Bridge
    iEast Fort Myers
    Blind Pass
    ine Island Sound
     ine Island Center
    IMatlacha
    oca Grande
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    wS)
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    wS)

    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    WS
    )
    14:5
    13
    ].4.5
    14
    1.2.5
    10.5
    9.5
    10.5
    9.5
    7.5

    13.5
    10.5
    11
    11
    10
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (60
    (30
    (60
    (60
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (45
    WS)
    wS)
    wS)
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    wS)
    WS
    )
    wS
    )
    WS)
    WS)
    WS
    )
    WS)
    WS
    )
    WS)
    15.5
    16
    16
    16
    16
    16
    15.5
    15.5
    15.5
    15.5
    15
    16.5
    16.5
    16.5
    16
    16.5
    2.5
    1
    2.5
    2
    .5
    -1.5
    -2.5
    -1.5
    -2.5
    -5.5

    1.5
    -1.5
    -1
    -1
    -2
    (60
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (60
    PARALLEL - 60 WS ONLY
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL EAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 5
    TOTAL
    DURATION -
    IN
    HOURS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(1)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    STORM
    TRACK ..
    irt Myers Beach
    1et. Myers Beach Bridge
    qanibel
    unta Rassa
    *hell Point
    *Cape Coral Parkway
    arney Point
    ona
    iver
    "ew Bridge
    ast Fort Myers
    Elind Pass
    Pine Island Sound
    ine Island Center
    .atl acha
    toca Grande
    2
    - .5
    2.5
    2
    .5
    -5.5
    -7.5
    -6.5
    -4
    14
    11.5
    14.5
    14
    12.5
    6.5
    4.5
    4
    8
    6.5
    6.5
    6.5
    6
    6
    5.5
    5
    5.5
    4.5
    4.5
    4.5
    6
    5.5
    5.5
    5
    4
    11.5
    11.5
    12
    11.5
    11.5
    10.5
    10
    10.5
    9
    9.5
    8.5
    13
    12.5
    12
    11.5
    12.5
    1
    -3
    -7
    -3
    -2.5
    13
    9
    3
    9
    9.5
    .                                             . ...            ..       - : " -  "'i"~;'I	'	:]>	!
    	'    ' '. ..	,*;	'` ;-
    .':
    '." . .                    . ".  I - :	;. ...'.	'" "t  "'
    ,       .. .          .          -     ,4,..	.1 t.                  .
    5

    I
    I
    APPENDIX A
    CROSSING
    I
    TOTALI

    ( Tilt
    PRE--EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY I
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING( 1)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    GRID
    STOtM
    POINTS
    STORM
    TRACK
     Fort Myers Beach
    Ft. Myers Beach Bridge
    Sanibel
    Punta Rassa
    Shell Point
    Cape Coral Parkway
    Harney Point
    Iona
    River
    New Bridge
    East Fort Myers
    Blind Pass
    Pine Island Sound
    Pine Island Center
    Matlacha
    Boca Grande
    3.5
    -1
    2
    5.5
    4
    (45
    (0
    (30
    (30
    (30
    SS)
    S)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    8.5

    7
    16'. 5
    15

    11

    6
    11.5

    4.5
    5.5
    .7"
    7
    6
    6.5
    7
    7.5
    7.5
    7.5
    8
    7.5
    8
    5
    5.5
    (15
    (15
    (15
    (15
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (45
    (30
    (30
    (15
    (15
    ss)
    SS)
    SS)
    ss)
    SS)
    ss)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    10
    10
    9.5
    10
    9
    10
    10
    10
    9
    10
    10.5
    9.5
    1.0
    (45 SS)
    1
    1.5
    4.5

    3.5
    1
    (30 SS)
    (30 SS)

    (45 SS)
    (45 SS)
    6
    5
    (30 SS)	9.5
    (30 SS)	10
    CROSSING
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL aAZARD TIMES -- CATEGORY 2

    TOTAL I
    DURATIOF
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HOURS I

    (30 SS)	11"
    (30 SS)	11.5
    (1-M -ZCQ \ In R
    IIOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS

    Fort Myers Beach
    Ft. Myers Beach Bridge
    Sanibel
    Punta Rassa
    Shell Point
    Cape Coral Parkway
    Harney Point
    Iona
    River
    New Bridge
    East Fort Myers
    Blind Pass
    Pine Island Sound
    Pine Island Center
    Mat lachaI
    Boca Grande
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(])
    TOTAL
    STOR4	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    4
    0
    2.5
    7
    5
    -3
    �-5.5
    (45
    (1]
    5
    (45
    (40
    (45
    (0
    (15
    ss)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    ss)
    S)
    SS)
    9.5
    11
    7.5
    18
    15
    7.5
    2.5

    11.5

    6.5
    16.5
    8.5
    15
    7.5.
    8.5
    8.5
    7.5
    8
    8
    9
    9
    9
    9
    9
    9.5
    6.5
    7
    7
    7.5
    6
    (
    (30
    (15
    (45
    (45
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (15
    (30
    (45
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    11.5
    12
    11.5
    11.5
    12.5
    1.2.5
    1.2.5
    12.5
    10.5
    11.5
    12
    1.1.5
    11
    U
    I
    I
    I
    1.5
    (45 SS)
    (45
    (45
    ( 0
    (30
    (45
    SS)
    SS)
    S)
    SS)
    SS
    )
    2
    6.5
    -3.5
    4
    1.5
    .,.-;.: ; .; ;.'
    ':
    '. .          .       ,-       .. ' ':   '  ':.
    I
    6

    APPENDIX A
    CROSSING
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 3
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    TOTAL
    DURATION
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HfOURS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFAI.L-
    FLOODING( 1)
    TOTAL
    .STOrMM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN IIOURS
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS
    Fort Myers Beach
    Ft. Myers Beach Bridge
    3anibel
     3unta Rassa
    IShell Point
    Cape Coral Parkway

    lona
    River
    New Bridge
    . ,ast Fort Myers
    Blind Pass
    Pine Island Sound
    ?ine Island Center
    4latlacha
    Boca Grande
    4
    .5
    2.5
    5.5
    4.5
    4
    -1
    -1'
    1.5
    -2.5

    2.5
    5.5
    (45
    (15
    (45
    (15
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (15
    (45
    (15
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    ss)
    SS)
    SS)
    SS)
    14
    11-5
    8
    16.5
    15.5
    15
    9.5
    10
    11.5
    8.5
    7.5
    7. 5
    6.5
    6.5
    7
    7.5
    7.5
    7.5
    8
    8
    8
    5.5
    6
    6.5
    6.5
    5.5
    (30
    (30
    (15
    (15
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (15
    (45
    (45
    (30
    (15
    (15
    (45
    (30
    (45
    SS)
    SS
    )
    SS)
    .ss
    )
    ss)
    SS)
    SS
    )
    sS
    )
    ss)
    SS)
    ss)
    ss
    )
    sS
    )
    sS
    )
    SS)
    ss
    )
    12
    12
    12
    12
    12
    12.5
    12.5
    13
    12
    12
    12.5
    12
    12.5
    11
    12.5
    11.5
    (45 SS)
    (45 SS)
    7
    15.5
    4
    1.5
    (45 SS)
    (45 SS)
    15
    11.5
    (1) Greatest  time  before landfall - not necessarily for ,
    cause early flooding even through they may not produce
    track produces same time, the one with the worse surge
    worst case storm; some
    highest surge - if more
    then chosen.
    tracks
    than 1
    (2) Greatest time before landfall - same is true for winds as above for flooding.

    ;.'            ,  ;   g '   .   '   ' .' .   .   '  .  .,  ' ..  . .
    7

    CHARLOTTE COUNTY - TABLE OF CONTENTS

    Section                                           Page #

    Hurricane Vulnerability .............................. II-C-1
    Recent Storm History ................................ II-C-4
    Affected Population ................................ II-C-8
    Motor Vehicles .......................................II-C-12
    Shelters .............................................II-C-13
    Routes ............................................... II-C-17
    Clearance Times ......................................II-C-21
    1991 Forecasts ......................................... II-C-28

    APPENDIX - Hazard Times ............................1...

    LIST OF MAPS
    Map                                                 Page #

    1. SLOSH Model Storm History Points .................. II-C-2
    2.  Maximum Areas Subject to Flooding ................. II-C-3
    3. Evacuation Zones ..................................II-C-9
    4.  Red Cross Managed Public Shelter Locations ........  II-C-15
    5. Evacuation Routes .................................11-C-18
    6.  Routes Subject to Rainfall Flooding ........-.......-C-22

    LIST OF TABLES
    Table                                                Page #

    1. Predicted Coastal Storm Surges .................... II-C-4
    2.  Hurricane Simulated by Surge Mode] ................. II-C-5
    3. Selected Storm Tracks ............................. II-C-7
    4. 1987 Housing Units ................................ II-C-10
    5. Population Estimates .............................. II-C-11
    6. Vehicle Estimates ............................ ....II-C-13
    7. Shelters .......................................... II--C-14
    8. Public Shelter Capacity ...........................II-C-14
    9. Population Displacement Ratio ..........II-C-l  -
    10. Shelter Satisfaction ...............................I-C-17
    11.  Evacuation Route Capacity Calculation ............. II-C-19
    12. Pre-Landfall Flood Conditions ..................... II-C-21
    13. Shelter Designations and Options .................. II-C-23
    14. Time to Clear ..................................... JI-C-24
    15. Ultimate Constricting Route ....................... II-C-25
    16. County Exiting Routes ............................ II-C-26
    17. Total Evacuation Time ............................... II-C-27
    18. }lousing UInits, 1991 ...............................1I-C-29
    19. Population Estimates, 1991 ........................ 11-C-30
    20. Motor Vehicle Estimates, 1991 ..................... -C-31
    21. Public Shelter Capacities, 1991 ...................11-C-32
    22. Revised Capacities ................................ TT-C-33
    23. Shelter Satisfactions, 1991 .......................11-C-33
    24. Revised Time to Clear, 1991 .-......................IC-34
    25.  Ultimate Constricting Route, 1991 ................. II-C-35
    26. Exiting Routes, 1991 ..............................II-C-37
    27.  Total Time, 1991                                  ..             .......................-.::lI-
    C' ;2 :;

    CHARLOTTE COUNTY
    PEACETIME EMERGENCY PLAN (Hurricanes)
    I                                [9J-5.012(2)(e)(i)]

     HIURRICANE VULNERABILITY

    The hurricane vulnerability of Charlotte County has been analyzed
    *     using  a  numerical storm surge prediction model known as  SLOSH,
    I short for Sea,  Lake,  and Overland Surges from Hurricanes.  This
    model is described in detail in the Regioniial Hurricane Evacuation
    Plans   1981-82,  prepared  by  the  Southwest  Florida	Regional
    Planning	Council;	as well as A Storm Surge Atlas for	Southwest
    Florida,	prepared	by  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric
    Administration,  UJndated,  @ 1983).   These reports analyzed some
    187  separate  storms  for their potential  impact  on  Southwest
    Florida,  including  Charlotte County.   Both reports provide  an
    assessment of methodologies and provide assumptions that can act
    towards   increasing  or  decreasing  forecast  flood  and   wind
    i     conditions.   However,  in summary, the following assumptions can
    bc made.

    |     (1)	Landfalling storms provide the worst flooding potential

    (2)	Flooding will be worse south of the eye of the hurricane

    3       (3)	Wind	conditions making roads unsafe for travel will	arrive
    well	before  the eye of the hurricane,  and usually	before
    flood waters inundate evacuation routes

    *  j  (4)  Storm  landfall  prediction is not an  exact  science.   Any
    approaching storm has the capacity to strengthen or veer,
    decreasing or increasing the flooding and surge potential of
    If    ~the storm.

    The SLOSH model used( fourteen points in Charlotte County for time
    i history  analysis.   These  points are depicted on  Map	1.   The
    greatest height of stormwaters for each category storm,	for each
    point, are summarized in Table 1.

    *    The  SLOSHIf  model also provides maps of the floodingp that may  be
    expected  in  Charlotte County.   The 187	different  simulatiorns
    have  been  summarized  by flood category,	and a zone	for  each
    I'   category  has  been  created  depicting  the  maximum	extent	of
    flooding resultinrg from all of the storms of that category.	The
    five zones thus created are depicted on Map 2.

    ; I~~~~~~~II-C-1
    ,,. II

    H
    H
    I

    tO
    A STORM HISTORY POINTS
    1 CAPE HAZE
    2 CHARLOTTE CO. LINE
    3, PLACIDA
    4 ALLIGATOR CREEK
    JR 5 FOOT CONTOUR LINES
    10 WEST HARBOR VIEW
    11 ALLIGATOR BAy
    12 SR 771 BRIDGE
    13 AINGER CREEK
    14  ENGLEWOOD BEACH
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    ACLINE
    PUNTA GORDA ISLES
    US 41, BRIDGE
    EAST PUNTA GORDA
    EAST GRASSY POINT
    O   I	"	4  5 MILES
    I I ..	I	I
    1'      MAP 1
    CHARLOTTE COUNTY
    SLOSH MODEL STORM HISTORY
    POINTS
    _  -  _  _  _  _  -  _  _            -  -  -  -  -  -  - _

    mm mm 'l / 'l M I I /� m I m m ima m / ~ ~

    0  I '.2 35 4  5 MILES
    SWFRP" DEC 87-RNC
    l
    1:'   MAP 2
    CHARLOTTE COUNTY
    MAXIMUM AREAS SUBJECT TO FLOODING
    BY STORM CATEGORY

    !
    TABLE 1

    PREDICTED COASTAL STORM SURGES SIMULATED BY
    SLOSH MODEL, LANDFALLING STORMS

    (If a point is over water, surge is reported in feet of
    flooding  above msl;  if a point is on land,  surge  is
    reported in feet above land at that point)*

    ELEVATION        STORM CATEGORY
    GRID POINT              OF POINT	1	2	3	4	5

    Cape Haze	1	5	8	13	16.5	15               1
    Charlotte Co. Line	1	5	9	13	17	17
    Placida	1	6	8. 10	14	13    -
    Alligator Creek	1	6	10	15	20	20.5
    Acline	13	-	-	4	9	10
    Punta Gorda Isles	4	4	7	13	18	19
    41 Bridge	1	7	11	17	22	24
    East Punta Gorda	1	7	11	17	22	24
    East Grassy Point	1	7	10	17	21.5	23
    West Harbor View	7	-	6	12	16.5	].9
    Alligator Bay	4	4	8	14	18.5	20
    771 Bridge	1	5	9	15	20	20
    Ainger Creek	1	6	8	12	15	14
    Englewood Beach	1	5	7	11	14	13

    *See Figures 8-11 for grid point locations.

    Although storms cannot be accurately forecast in regard to  their
    behavior,  the	187	simulations	did provide insights  into  the
    differences	in	pre-landfall	flooding   for    landfalling,
    paralleling,	and	crossing  storms.    These  differences	are
    summarized  in	Table 2 for hurricane eye location and points	of
    worst  impact.	Table 3 summarizes the nature of flood and  wind
    variation based on whether the storm is landfalling, crossing, or
    paralleling.   Appendix A summarizes the pre-eye landfall  hazard--
    times that the County may experience.

    Recent Storm History                     _

    The most recent hurricane impacts in Charlotte County were during
    Hurricane  Floyd.   This	storm,  on  October	16,  1987,	caused
    "recommended  evacuation"	advisories for  the	Charlotte	County
    Barrier	Islands.    Sixteen  people  were  admitted	to	county
    shelters,	and	an  unknown number sought shelter in	hotels  and
    motels  in	the	County.    Floyd  turned  away  before  directly
    impacting Charlotte County.

    The	County sustained minor beach erosion on the barrier  islands
    from	Hurricane Elena and Tropical Storm  Juan,	in  1985.   Some
    minor road flooding also occurred during Juan.	The major thrust
    of  both  of  these  storms  was  further  north,  but  voluntary
    evacuations were recommended from barrier islands.
    ;-~~   :       : ... - .: .. , - ..'.-:. :...................'.'--............,.::, :.';''' , -'.4't

    II-C-4
    !

    TABLE 2
    HURRICANES SIMULATED BY NUMERICAL
    STORM SURGE PREDICTION MODEL
    r.	c
    0	A	:
    C	T	:
    M	A	E
    O	T	T	G   : LANDFALL/EXITING POINT
    D	Y	I	O               OR
    E	P	O	R   :   CLOSEST APPROACI.
    L	E	N	Y
    . AREA RECEIVING
    MAXIMUM SURGE/WINDS
    Sl,	L	35NS
    SL	L.	35NS
    SL	rL	35NS
    SL	L	35NS
    SL	IL	35NS
    1	'Cape Haze
    2	:Cape Haze
    3	:Cape Haze
    4	:Cape Haze
    5	:Cape Haze
    East
    East
    East
    East
    East
    Punta Gorda
    Punta Gorda
    Punta Gorda
    Punta Gorda
    Punta Gorda
    1	:Englewood
    2	:Englewood
    3	:Englewood
    4	:Englewood
    5	:Englewood

    1	:Manasota Beach
    2	:Manasota Beach
    3	:Manasota Reach
    4	:Manasota Beach
    5	:Manasota Beach

    1	:South Venice
    2	:South Venice
    3	:South Venice
    4	:South Venice
    5	:South Venice
    ST.	L	40NS
    St.	L	40NS
    SL	L	4ONS
    SL	L	40NS
    SL	TL	40NS
    East
    East
    East
    East
    East
    Punta Gorda
    Punta Gorda
    Punta Gorda
    Punta Gorda
    Punta Gorda
    SL	L	45NS
    SL	L	45NS
    SL	L	45NS
    SL	L	45NS
    SL	iL	45NS
    Peace River Bridge
    Peace River Bridge
    Peace River Bridge
    Peace River Bridge
    Peace River Bridge

    Peace River Bridge
    Peace River Bridge
    Peace River Bridge
    Peace RiveL IRidge-
    Peace River Bridge

    East Punta Gorda
    East Punta Gorda
    East Punta Gorda
    East Punta Gorda
    East Punta Gorda

    East Punta Gorda
    East Punta Gorda
    S.L	L.	50NS
    SL	L	50NS
    SL	L	50NS
    STL	L	50NS
    ST,	L	50NS
    SL
    SL
    ST,
    SL
    SL

    S L
    L	55NS	I	:Venice
    L	55NS	2	:Venice
    L	55NS	3	:Venice
    L	55NS	4	:Venice
    rL	55NS	5	:Venice

    T.	O0NS	l	:Nokomis Beach
    L	60NS	2	:Nokomis Beach
    KEY:
    SL - SLOSH (Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges from
    Hlurricanes) Model
    L - Landfalling Hurricane
    C - Crossing Hurricane (Exiting Hurricane)
    P -- Paralleling HIurricane
    SS - South of Sanibel Island
    NS -4 North of Sanilbel Islald'        -
    II-C-5

    I
    TABLE 2 (Continued)
    HURRICANES SIMULATED BY NUMERICAL
    STORM SURGE PREDICTION MODEL
    L	C
    O	A
    C	T
    I
    I
    I
    M	A	E
    O	T	T	G   : LANDFALL/EXITING POINT
    D	Y	I	O                           OR
    AREA RECEIVING
    E	P	O	R               CLOSEST APPROACH                               MAXIMUM
    SURGE/WINDS
    L	E	N	Y
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -	------------_-      - - --_------_ _   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ _- _ - - _ -   _  _ _  _     _  _ _  _     _ - - _- _ _- _ , _- _ - - _-
    East Punta Gorda
    East Punta. Gorda
    East Punta Gorda
    SL
    SL
    SL
    L	60NS
    L	60NS
    L	60NS
    3	,Nokomis Beach
    4	:Nokomis Beach.
    5	'Nokomis Beach,

    1	':Casey Key
    2	:Casey Key
    2 :Casey Key
    3	'Casey Key
    4	:Casey Key
    5	:Casey Key
    SL	L	65NS
    SL	L	65NS
    SL	L	65NS
    SL	L	65NS
    SL	L	65NS
    771
    771
    771
    771
    771
    Bridge
    Bridge
    Bridge
    Bridge
    Bridge
    SL	L	70NS
    SL	L	70NS
    SL	L	70NS
    SL;	L	70NS
    SL	L	70NS
    1	:Siesta Key
    2	:Siesta Key
    3	:Siesta Key
    4	:Siesta Key
    5	:Siesta Key
    771
    771
    771
    771
    771
    Bridge
    Bridge
    Bridge
    Bridge
    Bridge
    I
    I
    SL
    SL
    SL
    SL
    SL

    SL
    SL
    SL
    SL
    SL
    L 75NS
    L 75NS
    L 75NS
    L 75NS
    L 75NS

    L 80NS
    L 80NS
    L 80NS
    L 80NS
    L 80NS
    1	:Longboat
    2	:Longboat
    3	:Longboat
    4	:Longboat
    5	:Longboat;

    1	ILongboat
    2	:Longboat
    3	:Longboat
    4	:Longboat
    5	:Longboat

    1	:LaBelle
    2	:LaBelle
    3	:LaBelle
    Key
    Key
    Key
    Key
    Key
    Venice Beach
    Venice Beach
    Venice Beach
    Venice Beach
    Venice Beach
    I
    I
    Key
    Key
    Key
    Key
    Key
    Bay Island
    Bay Island
    Bay Island
    Bay Island
    Bay Island
    I
    SL	C	45SS
    SL	C	45SS
    SL	C	45SS
    771 Bridge
    771 Bridge
    771 Bridge
    I
    I
    SL;
    ST.
    SL
    C 30SS
    C 30SS
    C 30SS
    1	:Alva
    2	:Alva
    3	:Alva
    771 Bridge
    771 Bridge
    771 Bridge
    I
    KEY:
    SL
    L
    C
    P
    SS
    RS
    - SLOSH (Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges from
    - Landfalling Hurricane
    - Crossing Hurricane (Exiting Hlurricane)
    -- Parallr;ling Ilurricane
    - South of Sanibel Island
    Right: of Santibel Island:
    I
    II-C-6
    I

    TABLE 3
    SELECTED STORM TRACTS BY CATEGORY AND TYPE
    STORM TRACK

    35NS-L-1
    55NS-L-1-
    75NS-L-1
    STORM CHARACTERISTICS
    S(1)
    S
    (1,)
    S(1)
    W(l)
    W(l)

    W(l.)
    W (2)
    W (2)
    W.(1)

    W(1)
    W(l)
    W(3)
    W(2)

    W(1)
    W(l)

    W(2)
    W (3)
    W(2)
    W(l)

    W(1)

    W(2)
    5SS-L-2
    35NS-L-2
    55NS-L-2
    75NS-L-2
    5(1)
    S (3)
    S(3),
    S(2)

    W(1)*
    S(2)
    S(4)
    S(4)
    5(3)
    95NS-L-3
    15 NS-L-3
    35NS-L-3
    55NS-L--3
    75NS-L-3

    15ES-P-2
    0 S-P-2
    3OWS-P-2
    GOWS -P-2
    W(M1
    S(I)
    5(1)
    S(1)
    15ES-P-3
    0 S-P-3
    3oWs-P-3
    50WS-P-3
    S(1)
    S(2)
    S(2)
    S(2)
    45NS-C-2
    15NS-C-2
    5(1)
    w(1)
    45NS-C-3
    15NS-C-3
    S(3)
    W(2)

    ,,

    C-

    (I) -
    (2) -
    (3) -

    NS
    ES
    W S
    S
    W
    S L
    -- South of Sanibel
    - North of Sanibel
    -- East of Sanibel
    - West of Sanibel
    - Storm Surge
    - Wirnd (over 40 mph)
    - SLOSHf Model
    Landfalling
    Para). iI ed
    Crossing

    Category I
    Category 2
    Category 3
    Saffir-Simpson Scale
    Category (1) - 4-5 foot Surge
    Category (2) - 6-8 foot Surge
    Category (3) - 9-12 foot Surge
    Category (4) - 13-18 foot Surge
    74-95 mph wind
    96-110 mph wind
    111-130 mph wind
    131-155 mph wind
    -. -.	.	., ,	-:                                    ..
    .. �    :.11                          ."  -.       -          .,,          .                .
    .	."	-	.	P-% '
    "       ..        ,
    II-C-7

    I
    The  last	hurricane  to  directly impact  Charlotte  County  was
    Rurricane	Donna in 1960.   This storm passed  through  Charlotte
    County on its path across the penninsula.  Donna was a Category 3
    storm with 177 mph winds.

    Affected Population

    Each zone depicted on Map 2 encompasses large segments of the
    County   population.	Each	one	has  a  certain   degree   of
    vulnerabil:ity  to  the	threat	of	hurricane  induced  flooding.
    Category 1 zones have the most repeated threat potential, whereas
    it is highly unlikely (but the potential exists) that category 5
    areas  will  need  to  evacuate  during	the  comprehensive  plan
    hor:izon.	.

    Each  zone,  as drafted,  mimics the coastline.   Geographically,
    however,  these zones are too cumbersome to assess the timing and
    shelter needs of the population.   Consequently,  in  associat:ion
    with  the Charlotte County Disaster Preparedness Department,  new
    subzones were created consistent with local knowledge used by the
    Department.   These are depicted in Map 3.   These sub-zones	are
    valid  solely for evacuation planning purposes and should not	be
    considered as identifying actual neighborhoods or communities.

    The first element in preparing an estimate of County population
    is to estimate dwelling units, and dwelling unit types. A count
    of housing units (principally single-family homes and mobile
    homes) was undertaken using aerial photographs. This information
    was supplemented with information on mobile home parks (provided
    by the Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services),
    rental units (provided by the Division of Hotels and Restaurants
    (FDCA), and Condominium information (from County tax rolls).

    A compilation of this information suggests that there are 48,932
    dwelling   units   in  the  county.    This   estimate   includes
    conventional housing, mobile homes, and transitional housing such
    as  inhabited  travel.  trailers,   and  hotel/motel  units.	The.
    greatest  concentration  of  these,  58.0%-O  are  located  in	the-
    Category 1 zone.  Table 4 provides the estimate of dwelling units
    in the County by Flood Zone and by community name.

    Using	the housing unit estimate,  a population estimate is  then
    made.	Two additional assumptions, however, are needed:  persons
    per  household,	and  vacancy rate.	The number of	persons	per
    household	was	estimated	to  be	a	standard  2.2	persons	per
    household,	regardless  of	unit.	Whereas this  assumption	has
    inaccuracies ;	the	end	result	probably  does	-ilot   di ffer
    si;gnificantly	from	a  more detailed  analysis.	More  detailed
    analysis,  however, is needed to determine vacancy rates for unit
    type,  since different unit types-have different vulnerability to
    flood or wind hazards.   Ising a survey estimate developed from a
    telephone	survey  in October-November,   1987,  two estimates	of
    seasonal	vacancy were developed for the region.   These  are	as
    follows:
    I
    I
    I

    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    .-]' ':. :..' .....:.':(  i: :-:' ':"' ..... -'c.:'; .' :. '
    "":::

    II-C-8

    - -    m  -  - - - 11   -
    H
    H
    I
    I

    0	3	-

    O     1	2	3	4 MILES
    ir~--	� _	-
    MAP 3
    CHARLOTTE COUNTY
    EVACUATION ZONES

    TABLE 4
    CHARLOTTE COUNTY - HOUSING UNITS
    Mobile	Recreational
    HIome	Vehicle
    Multi-Family
    Apartment     Condo
    IIotel
    -
    Duplex     Motel
    Residential
    Single-Family
    Storm
    Category
    Total
    Zone
    Barrier Tslands
    Myakka River
    Barrier Islands
    Cape HIaze
    Port Charlotte
    Peace River
    Pun la Gorlda
    South County
    321
    20
    321
    0
    379
    172
    87
    0
    789
    0
    789
    0
    938
    73
    810
    0
    2
    0
    2
    0
    0
    4
    0
    0
    151
    0
    151
    0
    158
    299
    159
    0
    6,523
    837
    8,523
    790
    8,867
    4,054
    6,769
    554
    4,528
    758
    4,528
    240
    7,392
    2,284
    3,767
    451.
    637
    59
    637
    550
    0
    1].,2
    01
    1,559
    103
    95
    0
    95
    0
    0
    21
    387
    0
    Tropical Storm
    I
    1.

    1
    1
    .1

    TOTALS	ZONE 1	19,420	4,109	503	979          2,610	6	767	28,394

    2	Cape IIaze	1,713	1,427	0	0	126	2	83	3,351
    2	Port Charlotte	3,062	0	0	0	1,036	84	0	4,182
    2	Shell Creek	172	15	0	3	0	0	0	190
    2	Punta Gorda	278	72	a0	0	0	8	358
    2	South County	12	0	0	0	0	0	0	12

    TOTALS	ZONE 2	5,237           1,514	0	3         1,162	86	91	8,093

    3	Cape Ilaze	621               0	0	0              0    .	26	0	647
    3	Port Charlotte	6,454	1,508	0	0	190	6	100	8,258
    3-.	Shell Creek	141	305	68	0	0	0	0	514
    3	Punta Gorda	298	173	0	0	2-	0	200	673

    TOTALS	ZONE 3	7,514	1,986	68	0	192	32	300       10,092

    4i	Port Charlotte	119	0	0	0	600	0	0	719
    4.	. Shell Creek	56	0	0	0	0	0	0	56
    4         Acline	193	690	117	0	0	0	21	1,021
    4:  Web	543	0	0	0	0	0	0	543

    TOTAI.S        ZONE 4'	911	690	117	0	600	0	21	2,339
    H
    H
    ~5';.  North County	0	0          0	0              0	0	0	0
    Webb	14	0	0      0	0	0	14

    TOTA J,	ZONE 5	14	0	0	0              0	0	0	14
    TOTALS'	ALL ZONES           33,096           8,299	688	982          4 564	1I 1W1 i8,91
    -	2- -           ~8, 9j1

    Unit Type               Seasonal Occupancy Rates
    IU~~~~~~ ~~~July                                 November

    Single-Family Unit	95%	96%
    Duplex (& Multiplexes)	95	96
    I             Apartment	70	78
    Condominium (Conventional)	51	64
    Mobile Hlome	43	75
    |   ~ Travel Trailer/R.V.	18	41
    Motel/Hotel	54	63

    In 1987,  Charlotte County is estimated to have a July population
    of 83,696, and a November population of;94,.l53.  This information
    is summarized by subzone in Table.5.. Numerically, the greatest
    seasonality occurs in Hurricane Category Zone 1, which has 53,998
    persons in July and 61,593 in November, an increase of 14.1%.

    TABLE 5
    CHARLOTTE COUNTY POPULATION ESTIMATES
    FOR EVACUATION ZONES

    Storm	Population Estimate
    Category     Zone	July	November

    1     Myakka River	1,671	1,733
    Barrier Islands	11,667	12,575
    *I     ~ Cape Haze	1,022	1,414
    Port Charlotte	17,273	17,802
    Peace River	6,628	7,645
    I|~ ~ Punta Gorda	10,733	12,387
    South County	1,040	1,122
    Mobile Homes, not otherwise	3,964	6,914
    included in the above flood
    prone areas (Category 2-5 Areas)

    TOTALS AREA 1	53,998	61,593

    2        Cape Haze	5,174	6,269        -
    Port Charlotte	7,738	8,107
    I8~ :       Shell Creek	378	393
    Punta Gorda	659	717
    South County	25	25
    Mobile Homes, not otherwise           2,531         4,415
    included in the above flood
    prone areas (Category 3-5 Areas)

    ----- NEW EVACUEES	12,542	13,01.3
    TOTALS 1 - 2	66,539	74,606
    _:_-C-1 1

    TABLE 5 (Continued)
    CHARLOTTE COUNTY POPULATION ESTIMATES
    FOR EVACUATION ZONES

    Storm	Population Estimate
    Category     Zone	July	November

    3        Cape Raze	1,471	1,368
    Port Charlotte	13,715	16,538
    Shel].] Creek	559           862
    Punta Gorda	981         1,195
    Mobile Homes, not otherwise	653    . 1,1.39
    included in the above flood          ;
    prone areas (Category 4-5 Areas)       '

    NEW EVACUEES	14; 84.8'	16,686
    TOTALS 1 - 3	81,387	91,292

    4      Port Charlotte	1,096	1,096
    Shell Creek	147           118
    Acline	513	1,608
    Webb                         1,176	1,147
    Mobile llomes, not otherwise               0             0
    included in the above flood
    prone areas (Category 5 Area)

    NEW EVACUEES	2,280	2,831
    TOTALS 1 -- 4	83,667	94,123

    5      North County	0	0
    Webb	29	30

    NEW EVACUEES	29	30
    TOTALS i - 5                  83,696        94,153

    Motor Vehicles

    Nearly  all  of the population affected by an oncoming  hurricane-
    will evacuate by private vehicle.   The question arises as to how
    many vehicles will be used in the evacuation.  Issues relevant to
    this  include the number of vehicles owned,  whether owners would
    be willing to leave any vehicles behind (since next to the  home,
    vehicles are the most expensive possession),  whether all drivers
    feel  con fi dent  to operate a vehicle in  storm  conditions-,  and
    whether	evacuating	families wish to be separated  in	different
    motor	ve	hicles.	Based  on  surveys,   respondents	indicated
    approximately	75%	of  available vehicles would be  used -in  an
    evacuation.	(Ifurricane Evacuation Plan, 1981--82, SWFRPC).  This
    averaged out to 1.] vehicles per occupied unit.

    Using this ratio of cars and the occupancy ratio used previously,
    the potential number of county vehicles used in an evacuation  in
    July would be 43,007,  and in November would be 47,110.  Category
    1  Zones	would   have the greatest number  of  vehicles,  23,199
    C(,5 ,233	with  .RVs and -mobile homes) in .July,a.nd  e3,.7?3.. '"2..'7,:0:'.:3' .:..

    II-C-12

    with RVs and mobile homes) in November.   Table 6 summarizes  the
    vehicle generation by each subzone.

    TABLE 6
    CHARLOTTE COUNTY VEHICLE ESTIMATES
    FOR EVACUATION

    CATEGORY   SIJBZONE        JULY    RECREATIONAL  NOVEMBER  RECREATIONAL
    VE IICTLE                  VEHICLE

    1	Myakka River           840	0         866	0
    1	Barrier Islands    5,888	17.      6,245	43
    I	Cape  THaze            511	,0         707	0
    1	Port Charlotte	8,724	0	8,901	0
    1	Peace River	3,350	4	3,813	9
    I	Punta Gorcia	5,310	70	6,019         175
    ]	South County           520	0         561	0

    2	Cape lHaze	2,587	0	3,135	0
    2	Port Charlotte	3,869	0	4,052	0
    2	Shell Creek	190	0	197	0
    2	Punta Corda	329	0	359	0
    2	South County	13	0	13	0

    3	Cape Haze	676	0	683	0
    3	Port Charlotte       7,630	0       8,269	0
    3	Shell Creek	292	12	401	31
    3	Punta Gorda	513	0	597	0

    4	Port Charlotte	461	0	548	0
    4	Shell Creek	59	0	59	0
    4	Acline	541	21.	788	53
    , Webb	567	0	573	0

    5	North County	0	0	0	0
    5	Webb	15	0	1.5	0

    TOTALS  ALL ZONES         42,883         124      46,800    a 3T0

    Shel. ters

    Evacuees must have a place to go.   The SWFRPC undertook  surveys
    in 1979 and 1981 to determine evacuee preferences.    This data is
    summarized as follows:	public shelters (24�), leaving the County
    (34%),	visit  friends	or  go to hotel or stay home  or  "other"
    (21o),	"don't know" (21%).   Those are preference  declarations;
    other-	stu Idies  indicat:e  there is a significant	variation  from
    pre-ference	to act.ual behavi or.   Additionally,	the severity  of
    imlpeindi.nrg	storms  may  al. so  change  decisions,   as  increased
    community-wide evacuation limits or eliminates the hotel/friends/
    public shelter/stay home prediction.

    II .             . -C -13

    At  this time,  the County has eighteen public shelters,  with  a
    capacity (at 20 square feet per person) of 12,503 persons. These
    shelters are summarized in Table 7, by vulnerability zone. They
    are depicted on Map 4.

    TABLE 7
    CfARLOTTE COUNTY SHELTERS
    Capacity
    20 sq.ft.
    Address              per Person

    Charlotte Ave., PG	180
    Beaver Lane    '	355
    Cooper Street, PG	406
    Toledo Blade Blvd., PC	400
    Tee and Green Estates	525
    Rotonda West	375
    Placida Road	800
    Atwater St., PC          1,000
    Lakeview Blvd.	920
    Breezeswept Ave.	80
    Hancock Ave., NW         1,250

    Aaron Street, PC           750
    Toledo Blade Blvd.	1,957
    Midway Blvd., NE	1,215
    Carmalita Street	825
    Cooper Street, PG	314
    Boundary Blvd.           1,000

    Englewood                  150
    Zone
    Vulner-
    ability

    ]
    2
    .1
    2
    2
    2
    2
    3
    1
    3
    1

    2
    2
    3
    1
    1
    2

    3
    Red Cross Managed Shelter

    Benjamin J. Baker Elem.
    Charlotte Harbor School
    Charlotte Sr. High
    Charlotte Vo-Tech Center
    East Elementary School
    L.A. Ainger School
    Lemon Bay High
    Liberty Elementary
    Meadow Park Elementary
    Neal Armstrong Elementary
    Peace River Elementary
    Port Charlotte Cultural
    Center
    Port Charlotte High
    Port Charlotte Jr. ligh
    Punta Gorda Jr. high
    Sallie Jones Elementary
    Vineland Elementary
    West Charlotte Com-
    munity Center*
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    Capacity:   12,503 persons
    TOTAL:   18 Shelters
    I
    I
    *Secondary Shelter
    the county  fas-
    the county can
    stormn in July,
    County's public
    Based upon the evacuees forecasted in Table 5,
    limited  public shelter capacity.   For example,
    accommodate  23.2% of the evacuees of Category 1
    and  20.3% in November.   Table 8 summarizes the
    shelter capacities for storms.

    TABLE 8
    PUBLIC SHELTER CAPACITY
    I

    PERCENT MET                I
    L.Y    NOVEMBER

    JU
    STORM.
    CATEGORY
    EVACUEES
    JULY     NOVEMBER
    SPACE

    12,353
    7,657
    3,252
    3,252
    3,252

    61,593	23.2	20.3
    74,606	11.5	10.3
    91,292	4.0	3.6
    9,1,123	3.9	3.5
    94,153	3.8	3.5

    II-C-14
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    53,998
    66,539
    81,387
    83,667
    83,696

    m  m - m m m m m m - - a - - - - -

    N.
    N
    "
    ctl
    W pt
    C74
    LEGEHD
    NOTE: FLOOD HEIGHTS
    AT SHORELINE
    o~  �.,  775  b-�,%  r /;y

    .-INI~'                            CHARLOrrE
    "'7 6,,"�"/  '1        HARBOR

    .I  C)
    0.
    .I ,I
    H
    H
    I
    0

    hi
    Cn
    UP TO 7 FEET
    ABOVE MEAN
    SEA LEVELCMSL)
    1.11....
    ,_e_
    mm
    F
    pl
    1\
    UP TO 11 FEET
    ABOVE MSL
    UP TO 17 FEET
    ABOVE MSL
    I
    SWfRPC-87 RNC
    SHELTERS &
    1. BENJAMIN J. BAKER ELEMENTARY
    2.	CHARLOTTE HARBOR SCHOOL
    3.	CHARLOTTE SENIOR HICH SCHOOL
    4.	CHARLOTTE VO-TECH CENTER
    5. EAST ELEMENTARY SCIIOOL
    6. L.A. AINBGER SCHOOL
    7.	LEMON BAY HIGH SCHOOL
    8.	LIBERTY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
    9.	MEADOW PARK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
    10.	NEAL ARMSTRONa ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
    11.	PEACE RIVER ELEMENTARY SCIIOOL
    12.	PORT CHARLOTTE CULTURAL CENTER
    13.	PORT CHARLOTTE HIGH SCHOOL
    14.	PORT CHARLOTTE JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL
    15.	PUNTA GORDA JUNIOR HIGH  SCHOOL
    16.	SALLIE JONES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
    17.	VINELAND ELEMENTARY
    18.	WEST CHARLOTTE COMMUNITY CENTER
    I
    MAP 4
    CHARLOTTE COUNTY
    RED CROSS MANAGED PUBLIC SHELTER LOCATIONS
    5 MILES
    W.-

    I
    Public shelter demand within the County is not the only means of
    meeting evacuee shelter nieeds.   Regretfully,  it seems to be the
    largest.	Of these, only the hotel option can be assessed.  Other
    sources	of shelter include "friends," hotels,  or one's own home
    (refusal to evacuate).

    In  Charlotte  County,  there are an estimated 1,179  hotel/motel
    rooms. By far the greatest portion (65%) of the rooms are located
    on the shoreline or are in the Category l storm surge zone.  This
    leaves  only 412 units available in a Category 1  storm,  321  in
    Category 2, 21 in Category 3, and 4 storms and none in a Category
    5 storm.
    I
    The  412 units,  at 100% occupancy (2.2 persons per room),  would
    satisfy	only  1.7% of the demand for shelter space in  July	and
    1.5%  in	November for a Category 1 storm.   In  Category  2	and
    greater storms,  the availability of commercial hotel/mote] space
    is essentially nil.

    In summary,  the public and commercial hotel/motel shelter  space
    meets this much of county evacuee needs:

    Storm Category 1 = 24.9% July, 21.8% November
    Storm Category 2 = 12.6% July; 11.3% November
    Storm Category 3 =	4.0% July;	3.6% November
    Storm Category 4 =	3.9% July;	3.5% November
    Storm Category 5 =	3.8% July;	3.4% November

    Without  public or private commercial space  available,	evacuees
    have  only  the options of (a) staying with friends  who	are  in
    safer areas within the county or (b) leaving the county for areas
    of the state expected to be less affected by the hurricane.   The
    County's ability to "stay with friends" is limited.  The capacity
    of  space  available  for evacuees,  when staying  with	friends,
    decreases rapidly as the ratio of evacuees to those not	affected
    increases.  This problem is depicted in Table 9.

    TABLE 9  -
    POPULATION DISPLACEMENT RATIO

    STORM                      POPULATION
    CATEGORY        DISPLACED	NOT DISPLACED          RATIO
    July	November	July	November	July  November

    1	53,998	61,593	29,698	32,560	1.8:1	1.9:1

    2	66,539	74,606	17,]157	19,547	3.9:1	3.8:1              I

    3	81,387	91,292	2,309	2,861	35:1	32:1.

    4	83,667	94,123	29	30	>36:1	>33:1

    5	83,696	94,153	0	0	>36:1	>33:1

    ii -c-16

    II-C-16 ;
    I

    For  Category  1 storms,  those wishing to stay with friends  (as
    opposed to leaving the county or staying in public shelters or
    hotels/motels)  will  probably find that they are not able to	do
    so.   The	SWFRPC  1981	Evacuation Plan	estimates	13%  of	the
    evacuating	population	will. take  this	option.	However,	the
    opportunity	to  stay	with friends rapidly  decreases  as	storm
    intensity	increases	(forcing more people to  evacuate).	In	a
    Category	1 storm in July only 7.2% and 6.8% in November will	be
    able  to	stay  with  friends.    In  a  Category  2  storm,	the
    percentage of evacuees able to stay with a friend has fallen to
    3.3% in July and 3.4% in November; for Category 3 storms, and
    greater storms the figure becomes almost trivial.

    These  percentages,  added to the public',ahd commercial  summary,
    absorb the remainder of "in county" shelter demand  satisfaction.
    This is summarized in Table 10.

    TABLE 10
    SHELTER SATISFACTION IN CHARLOTTE COUNTY

    PERCENT MET
    CATEGORY	JULY	NOVEMBER

    1	32.1	28.6
    2	15.9	14.7
    3	4.5	4.1
    4	3.9	3.5
    5	3.8	3.5

    If shelter needs can'not be met within the County, they must be
    met  outside  of the County.   For this reason,  a  knowledge  of
    routes and route capacities becomes important.

    ROITES

    Arterial	roadways form the backbone of any hurricane	evacuation
    effort.	Charlotte  County's roadway system provides	relatively.
    few  options	for  evacuees  coming  from  the  coast.	This --is-
    particularly	true in the Cape Iaze area where 3 major	highways
    narrow  to just one (SR 776) across the Myakka River.	Charlotte
    County Evacuation Routes are depicted on Map  5.   Identification
    of routes is the first stop in assessing the roadway system.	The
    next  step  is assessing roadway capacities.	The capacities	of
    these    roadways   have	been   developed	based   on    their
    characteristics,  tied  to	the assessme.nt methodologies  of  the
    Righway'Capacity Manual, 1985.  These capacities are contained in
    Table  l .

    An important aspect of any route is its condition.   Many  routes
    along the shore are low lying.   Their propensity to flood due to
    sur-ge  or  tidal ac:tion causes their reliability to operate as	a
    route to cease several hour-s before storm landfall.   Appendix	1
    depicts these possibilities.   In most cases, however, winds, not
    shoreline flooding, will initially make'-roads unsafe for travel.

    �: -  .  .: . � ;  : :  -.  .-  .�.��'~.:    - ..:  . .  ,,  .  . �  .  .,. -+ ..  :1';
    II-C-17

    c'N
    c_
     MAP 5
    CHARLOTTE COUNTY
    EVACUATION ROUTES

       m m m m m -m m m!   m       - m m

    TABLE 11
    EVACUATION ROUTE CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
    CHARLOTTE COUNTY
    PER-
    CENT NO
    PASSING
    ZONES
    MAXIMUM
    HRLY. FLOW/
    FLOW RATE
    (LOS D)
    LANE
    # OF   WIDTII
    LANES ,(FT.)
    DESIGN
    SPEED
    (MPII)
    TRAFFIC FLOW SPLIT
    50/50  70/30  90/10
    IIIGIIWAY
    TYPE
    ROUTE
    1-75
    Sarasota Co. to Lee Co.

    US 41
    Sarasota Co. to Toledo
    Blade Blvd.
    Toledo Blade Blvd. to
    Harb.orview Dr.
    Harbarview Dr. to Aqui
    Esta Dr.
    Aqui Esta Dr. to Lee Co.

    US 17
    Desoto Co. to CR 74
    CR 74 to I-75
    1-75 to US 41
    2,407

    2,260

    2,034

    2,014
    2,260
    4

    4

    4

    4
    4
    12	70	Freeway

    12	70	Rur.Div.

    12	70	Sub.Div.
    70	Sub. Div.
    70	Rur. Div.
    12
    12
    1,034
    1,964
    2,579
    689
    859
    930
    2
    4
    6
    11	60
    12	60
    12	50
    90
    Sub. Div.
    Sub. Div.
    SR 775'
    Sarasota Co. to SR 776

    SR 776
    . SR 775't-o US .41
    927	1,005

    944	1,022
    100
    1,489

    1,257
    745

    757
    2

    2
    12     60
    12     60
    90
    SR 31
    Desoto Co. to Lee Co.

    CR 771
    SR 776 to Boca Grande
    Caus.:eway
    80
    930
    620
    772
    837
    2
    10     60
    1,027       685    853    924
    2  11
    60
    80

    TABLE 11 (CONTINUEDI
    EVACUATION ROUTE CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
    CHARJOTTE COUNTY
    PER-
    CENT NO
    HIGIIWAY PASSING
    TYPE     ZONES
    MAXIMUM
    HRLY. FLOW/
    FLOW RATE
    (LOS D)
    LANE
    # OF   WIDTH
    LANES '(FT.)
    DESIGN
    SPEED
    (MPH)
    TRAFFIC FLOW SPLIT
    50/50  70/30  90/10
    ROUTE
    CR 775
    SR 776 to CR 771

    CR 74
    US 17 to SR 31
    SR 31 to Glades Co.
    2
    11	60

    12	60
    9	60
    90
    1,027

    1,063
    751
    685

    709
    500
    853

    882
    623
    924

    957
    675
    2
    2
    80
    80
    CR 765 (Burnt Store Rd.)
    US 41 to Lee Co.

    Gasparilla Rd.
    CR 771 to Lee Co.

    King's Highway
    US 41 to Desoto Co.

    North -Rotonda/Sunnybrook
    SR 776 to Rotonda
    2

    2

    2
    12     70
    80
    1,241

    1,061

    880

    1,228

    1,274
    748

    707

    586

    690

    767
    931   1,009
    H
    H

    0
    O
    881

    731

    859
    12     60
    90
    954

    792

    931
    10     60
    80
    Blvd.
    2
    11     50
    70
    Toledo Blade Blvd.
    Sarasota Co. to US 41

    Tuck&-r Grade Blvd.
    US 41 to 1-75
    2
    12     70
    60
    956  1,036
    4
    12     70     Rur.Div.
    2,395
    NOTE:
    5:
    The Peak Hour Factor
    assumed to be .75 in
    t
    was assumed
    ALL cases
    to be .95 and the Driver Population Factor

    I
    ,
    m	wn_mm im	-                m
    I	~            I / I	I I I                 I I I

    Rainra I I  flooding, however,  may constitute a greater hazard to
    evacuation  route operation than either early shoreline  flooding
    I       or  early winds.   This is because roadways may flood and  become
    partially  or totally impassible early in  an  evacuation.   Such
    areas  have been documented for different storms and are depicted
    on  Map  6.   These  are areas that must  be  passed  before  the
    presupposed onset of heavy rains, which is eight hours before eye
    landofall.   This is relevant for Category 1 storms for most areas
    of Chairlotte County and for fewer areas for Category 2 or greater
    storms.

    Cl earance Times

    There  are  several factors taken into aCtount  when  calculating
    community clearance time.  The first is the nature of the threat.
    Although there are no assurances that 'the County cannot be struck
    by  Category 4 and 5 storms,  the probabilities of this are  low.
    The County does, however, lie subject to storms of Category 1, 2,
    and  3  strength in decreasing probability.   With each storm  of
    increasing  strength,  the  number of persons and  vehicles  also
    increases.

    Other  factors contributing to clearance time are the	number  of
    vehicles	evacuating  and  the  capacity  of  roadways	to  carry
    evacuees.	This translates into a number of hours it will take to
    move persons past any given point.

    The  final  factors  are the amount and	distance  of	"stopping"
    opportunities  offered  evacuees,   and	the  distance	to  these
    opportunities.   If  the largest amount of stopping opportunities
    needed are only ten miles inland, the time is much less for an
    evacuation than if they are 100 mie.cs distant.

    These factors compose the evacuation time.	For certain suhzones
    within  the  County,  times  are  less  than	for  others.   This
    variation  is  because pre-landfall flood conditions are  not  as
    bad,  shelter locations are closer, and better quality evacuation
    routes  are available.   Table 12 summarizes  pre-landfal.l  fl-of-
    conditions,	Tablle  13 summarizes shelter distances and	options,
    *  Q   and  Table	14  summarizes the time it takes to  clear	the  most
    restrictive point on the route for each community for each of the
    slow, intermediate, and quick responses.

    TABLE 12
    PRE-LANDFALL FLOOD, CONDITIONS

    __I   TItME TO
    ZONE                    CATEGORY    COASTAL FLOOD	RAINFALL	WIND

    I      Myakka River	1	4.0	.8	5.0
    Barrier Islands	1	4.5	8	5.5
    Cape [raze	1	4.5	8	5.5
    Port Charlotte	1	4.0	.8	5.0
    Peace River	1	1.-0	8	4.5
    Punta Gorda             .	1      .' 1..0. -	8	. J,!5'.:--
    II-C-21

    I

    qr

    775  CT71                                       U
    HorboI
    CT65

    SR'31

    LEE Co.

    PI   23 4 Miles
    SWFRPC 87- RNC

    -MAP 6
    CHARLOTTE COUNTY
    ROUTES SUBJECT TO RAINFALL FLOODING
    r~~ -i -    --       --       --

    TABLE 12 (Continuedl
    PRE-LANDFALL FLOOD CONDITIONS
    TIME TO
    COASTAL FLOOD   RAINFALL   WIND
    ZONE
    CATEGORY
    South County
    Cape Haze
    Port Charlot.te
    Shell Creek
    Punta Gorda
    South County
    Cape fHaze
    Port Charlotte
    Shell Creek
    Punta Gorda
    1
    2
    2
    2
    2
    2
    3
    3
    3
    3
    3.0
    5.0
    4.5
    1.5
    1.5
    _3.5
    :5.5
    4.0"
    ' '2.0
    '2.0
    8
    8
    8
    8
    ,8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    5.0
    6.5
    6.0
    5.5
    5.5
    5.5
    8.5
    7.5
    '7.5
    7.5
    TABLE 13
    DESIGNATIONS AND OPTIONS
    SHELTER
    PUBLIC SHELTERS
    NAME
    ESTIMATED
    TRAVEL TIME
    CATEGORY
    ZONE
    I	Myakka River

    1	Barrier Islands

    1	Cape Haze

    1	Port Charlotte

    1	Peace River

    1	Punta Gorda
    I	South County
    2	Cape Haze

    2	Port Charlotte

    2	Shell Creek
    2	Punta Gorda
    2	South Counlty

    3	All Category 3
    Zones
    Port Charlotte High School
    Charlotte Vo-Tech Center
    Liberty Elementary School
    W. Charlotte Comm. Ctr.
    Lemon Bay High School
    L.A. Ainger School
    Vineland Elementary
    Lemon Bay High School
    L.A. Ainger School
    Vineland Elementary
    W. Charlotte Comm. Ctr.
    Charlotte Harbor School
    Port Charlotte High School
    Charlotte Vo-Tech Center
    Liberty Elementary School
    Port Charlotte Jr. High School
    Neal Armstrong Elementary School
    East Elementary School
    East Elementary School
    W. Charlotte Comm. Ctr.
    Liberty Elementary School
    Neal Armnstrong Elementary School
    Port Charlotte Jr. High School
    Liberty Elementary School
    No Shelter Availability
    No Shelter Availability
    No Shelter Availability
    .30 hr

    .40 hr
    .15 hr
    .15 hr
    .30 hr
    .30 hr
    .30 hr
    .30 hr
    .30 hr
    .50 hr
    .20 hr
    .20 hr
    .20 hr.
    .30--hf
    .20 hr
    .20 hr
    .30 hr
    .45 hr
    .20 hr-
    .50 hr
    .10 hr
    .10 hr
    .20 hr
    I
    I .
    I
    I
    I

    Il
    No Shelter Availability
    II-C-23

    TABLE 14
    TIME TO CLEAR

    -_ _ _ _JULY      - -
    INTER-
    NOVEMBER
    INTEIR-
    CATEGORY
    ZONE
    RESTRICTING
    POINT ,

    SR 776

    SR 776

    S1? 776

    US 41

    JUS 17

    US 41

    CR 765

    C  775

    Toledo Blade

    US 17

    US 17

    CR 765

    Pine Street

    Kings Highway
    L
    CR 74

    C1 765
    TO COUNTY
    LIINE

    0.5

    0.6

    0.6

    0.4

    0.3

    0.4

    0.7

    0.5

    0.3

    0.3

    0.3

    0.7

    0.1

    0.2

    0.7

    0.7
    SLIOW  MEDIATE	QUICK	SLOW	MEDIJAT
    	QUIJCK

    1.]	0.9	0.8	1.1	0.9	0.8

    7.8	6.3	5.8	8.3	6.7	6.2

    0.7	0.5	0.5	0.9	0.7	0.7

    -	4.3	-	-	1.4	-

    1
    1

    i

    1

    H          .
    H
    1

    to

    2
    2

    2

    3
    3

    3

    3
    Myakka River

    3arrier Is l ands

    Cape Hlaze

    Port Charlotte

    Peace River

    Punta Gorda

    South County

    Cape Hlaze

    Port Charlotte

    Shell Creek

    Punta Gorda

    South County

    Cape TIaze

    Port Charlotte

    Shell Creek

    Punta Gorda

    5.5	4.5

    -	3.1

    0.8	:0.6  .

    4.2	3.4:-

    5.3	'5.2

    0.3	0.2

    0.5	0.4

    0.1	0.1

    -	0.8
    4.2

    0.7

    3.5

    5.0

    0.3

    0.5

    0.1
    3.9

    2.7

    0.6

    2.

    4.0

    0.2

    0.4

    0.1
    3.6

    0.5

    2.6

    3.7

    0.2

    0.4

    0.1
    4.1

    0.6

    3.]

    3.9

    0.2

    0.4

    0.1

    10.4

    0.5

    0.6
    0.8
    13.0

    0.4

    0.7
    10.4

    0.3

    0.6
    9.6

    0.3

    0.5
    14.1

    0.6

    0.8
    11.3

    0.5

    0. 5
    ~~mm~~mmmm~m~mmm~

    A  constricting point from Table 14 (on the following  page)  may
    represent  an ultimate constricting point for more than one zone.
    That  being the case,  it may be expected that these times  (from
    Table 14) will become cumulative.   This creates a "greatest time
    to  clear"  For  the county as a whole.   Table  15  depicts  the
    "greatest time to clear" calculation for each category storm.

    TABLE 15
    ULTIMATE CONSTRICTING ROUTE

    July_                November
    Constricting	Inter-                   . Inter-
    Category      Route	Slow	mediate	Quick	Slow  mediate	Quick

    1	SR 776	9.6	7.7	. .7.1	10.3	8.3	7.-7

    2	SR 776	9.6	7.7	7.1	10.3	8.3	7.7

    3   Kings Highway	13.0	10.4	9.6	14.1	11.3	10.4

    Clearly, route constriction becomes a concern when it is unevenly
    distributed between different parts of the County. .The relative
    isolation of the Cape Haze area, and much of the Barrier Islands
    region  (which has no roads) limits evacuation capacity,  causing
    large times on SR 776.  Even so, it is conceivable that increased
    traffic  control can better distribute loadings.   In that  case,
    the  ultimate  constricting points would move to the sum  of	the
    routes exiting the County.   Table 16 depicts the times that	may
    occur, given different routing scenarios.

    The last factor to be incorporated into calculating the County
    clearance	time  is	the response of	potential  evacuees  to  an
    ev:lr:uation	order.	The  original	1981-82  Regional  Hurricane
    Evacuation	Plan discussed this topic on page 125,	and concluded
    that  seven	hours would be the minimum time needed	to  clear  a
    zone, because some evacuees would daudle more than others. More
    recent  history	indicates	that sudden or  dramatic	changes  in
    hurricanes  caln	heighten	the evacuees response into	a  "qui-ck'
    evacuation, limited basically by road capacity. Consequently, in
    evaluating   the   f:inal  criteria  that   determines   a   slow,
    intermediate, or quick evacuation, both slow and intermediate
    zones  will have a minimum response time of seven hours;	"quick"
    times, however, will be limited only by roadway capacity.	All of
    these fact:ors combine into creating a countywide clearance	time.
    Th is  time  will  vary depending upon the  routes  available  for
    count.y evacuation,	the time of season, and whether it is a slow,
    intermediate,   or	quick  response.   Tabl.e  17  summari zees	the
    con ribut iorn  to the greatest clearance ti.me for the  County	for
    each category storm.

    :,................... ""' ..... i.  . ,
    II-C-25

    TABLE 16
    COUNTY EXITING ROUTES

    JULY	NOVEMMBER
    SLOW  INTER-  OUICK   SLOW	INTER-  QUICK
    MIED IATE	ME DITATE,
    TOTAL
      OFl
    COMBINED CAPACITIES
    SLOIW INTER- QUICK
    ME, DIATEi
    VEITICLES   TOTATL COITNTY
    LEAVING CO.   VHITCL1ES
    ROUTES
    CATEGORY
    3,966   4.9   4.4      4.3    5.6   5.1
    4.9

    5.5

    8.1

    5.4
    67.9
    71.4

    84.1
    85.3

    95.5
    95.9

    84. 1
    85.3
    US4i/SR 776
    UIS 17

    US 41/SR 776
    ITS 17/CR 74

    same as 2(a)

    same as 2(a)
    plus 1-75
    3,460 3,817
    I(a) ..  16,931.(J)
     19,520(N)

    2(a) 7   25,387(J)
    26,852(N)
    5.2	6.4	5.7

    7.6	9.53	8.5

    5.1	6.0	5.6
    4,169	4,699	4,923	6.1	5.4

    4,,169	4,699	4,1923	9.0	8.0

    6,576	7,106	7,330	5.7	5.3
    9 (a)
    37,520(J)
    39,730(N)
    H
    H
    3(b)  )  37,529(J)
    39,730(N)
    -   - ~ .   -   -     -      -      -      -      -      -      -              -      -      -      -      -      -      -

    -  -----                                      --  -  --  -  ----mm~           mmm

    N -I
    TABLE 17
    CLEARANCE TIME
    ---OUT
    SUMMARY
    I NT El-
    SLOW  MEDIATE  QUITCK
    I N TE R
    -
    SLOW MEDIATE
    QUICK
    WEATHER (2)
    .CATEGORY DESTINATION(1)
    0 .
    7
    8
    (J) 7.9 (J) 6.3
    (N) 8.6 (N) 6.9
    (3) 5. 8
    (N) 6. 4
    (J)16.6 (J)15.0
    (N)17.3 (N)15.6
    (J) 1.4.
    5
    (N) 15. 1
    0. 7
    8
    (J) 5.0 (J) 4.0
    (N) 5.4 (N) 4.3
    (J) 3. 7
    (N) 4.0
    (J)13.7 (!J)12.7
    (N) 14. 1 (N).13. 0
    (J) 1 2. 4
    (N) 1 2. 7
    3
    0. 7
    S. 5
    (J)12.8 (J)10.3
    (N)3.4.4 (N)II.5
    (J) 9. 5
    (N) 10 .7
    (J)22.0 (J)19.5
    (N)230.6 (N)20.7
    (J ) 17.
    6
    (N) 19. 9
    H

    H

    I)

    (1)	Fro	Table, 13,or 14, whichever  is  greater

    (2)	From	Table  .1.2

    U
    PART II - 1991 FORECASTS

    Part   of  hurricane  preparedness  involved  understanding   and               I
    evaluating the growth that the study shows Charlotte County may
    expect in the forthcoming years.    This element discusses  short-
    ranged  growth  (4  years)  the  County  may  undergo,    and  the
    falcilities that are expected to be added to serve that growth.

    The  growth	predicted follows a single  straight-lined  forecast
    technique.	Applied   uniformly,    increases  by	category	an                I
    community  for  housing,  persons,  'and  vehicles	for  ]991	are
    depicted in Tables 18, 19 and 20.

    Table 18 forecasts a total of 57,151 dwelling units for 1991.

    Table 19 forecasts a total of 99,710 persons in July; and 113,020
    in November.

    Table 20 forecasts a total of 50,359 vehicles in July; and 56,515
    vehicles in November.

    The   additional	facilities  expected  can  be  categorized   as
    "shelters"  and	"routes."  Route improvements can be  determined
    from county and State five-year plans.  Shelters (schools) can be
    estimated  from	school  board plans  for  new  construction	and
    improvements  to	existing  schools which in turn  are  based	on
    projected population growth.
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    ;-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    II-C-28

    TABLE 18
    CHARLOTTE COUNTY - HOUSING ESTIMATES FOR 1991
    (Based on projected units of 57,151)

    Storm	Residential	Mobi l e	Travel-	_     .      }ulti-Fami_ ly Hotel-
    Category         Zone	Single-Family	Home	Trailer	Apartment      Condo	Duplex	Motel	Total,

    I	Nlyakka River	891	69	N/P*	20	24	N/I'	N/P	1,004
    I	Barrier Islands	5,321	749	112	377	927	2	177	7,665
    I Canc flaye.	282	6,1/6	N/P	N/P	N/      P        N/P
    928
    I1	Port Charlotte	8,686	N/P	N/P	445	1,102	N/P	186	10,419
    1	Peace R:iver	2,684	1,411	25	202	86	6	351	4,765
    '1	Punta Gorda	4,426	1,832	455	102	952	N/P	187	7,954
    .1	South County	530	121	N/P	N/P	N/P	N/P	N/P	657

    TOTALS	ZONE 1	22,820	4,328	592	1,146	3,091	8	901	33,386

    :2	Cape taze	2,013	1,677	N/P	N/P	148	2	98	3,938
    2	Port Charlo'. t	3,598	N/    P	N/P	N/P	1,217	99	N/P	4,914
    2	Shell Creekl	202	18	N/P	4	N/P	N/P	N/P	224
    H         2	Punta Gorda	327	85	N/P	N/P	N/P	N/P	9	121
    H
    I  .2     South County           14            N/P        N/P           N/P            N/P
    N/P        N/P           14
    C)~ ~ ~~~~~-
    tQ   TOTALS	ZONE 2             6,1.54	1,780	N/P	4	1,.65  .	101	107	9,511

    3	Capc Haze a730	N/P	N/P	N/P	N/P./	31	N/P	761
    ..3	Port Charlotte	7,584	1,772	N/P	N/P	23ff-	8	1.00	9,687
    "::' 3	Shell Creek	.166	358	80	N/P     '	N/P	N/P	I/P	604
    ;.3	Punta Gorda	350	203	N/P	N/P	2	N/P	200	755

    TOT:ALS	ZONE 3	8,830	2,333	80	N/P	225	39	300       11,807

    ." Port Charlotte	140	N/P	N/P	N/P	705   .	N/P	N/P	845
    4	Shel1. Creek	66	N/P	N/P	N/P	N/P	N/P	N/P	66
    fI.'4	Acl i ne	227	811	138	N/P	N/P	N/P	25	1,201
    7,	Wcbb	638	N/P	N/P	N/P	N/P	N/P	N/P	638

    TOTA:LS	ZONE 4	1,071	811	138	N/P	705	N/P	25	2,750

    .i       North CounLy	N/P	N/P	N/P	N/P	N/P	N/P	N/P	N/P
    ;73<,5	Webb	17  [	N/P	N/P	N/P	N/P	N/P	N/P	17

    TOTALS	zo0, 5	17	N/P	N/P	N/P	N/P	N/P	N/P	17

    't No  .rojection

    TABLE 19
    CHARLOTTE COUNTY POPULATION ESTIMATES
    FOR 1991

    Storm	Population Estimate
    Category     Zone	July         November

    I     Myakka River	1,985	2,064
    Barrier Islands	13,709	14,777
    Cape Haze	1,200	1,66].
    Port Charlotte	20,296	20,918
    Peace River	7,791	8,896
    Punta Gorda	1.2,611	14,556
    South County	1,222'	1,319
    Mob:ile Homes & Recreational	4,,658	8,1.25
    Vehicles, not otherwise -
    included in the above flood
    prone areas (Category 2 - 5 Areas)

    TOTAL	ZONE 1	63,474	72,405                    |

    2	Cape Haze	6,080	7,367
    Port Charlotte	9,092	9,526
    Shell Creek	445	463
    Punta Gorda	773	842
    South County	29	30
    Mobile Homes & Recreational       2,974          5,188
    Vehicles, not otherwise in-
    cluded in the above flood
    prone areas (Category 3 - 5 Areas)

    NEW EVACUEES	14,737	15,291
    TOTALS 1 - 2	78,210	87,696

    3      Cape Haze	1,709	1,609
    Port Charlotte	16,129	19,425
    Shell Creek                   63.6	1,013           ... .
    Punta Gorda                 1,090	1,354        -
    Mobile Ilomes & Recreational      767	1,338
    Vehicles, not otherwise in-
    cluded in the above flood
    prone areas (Category 4-5 Areas)

    NEW EVACUEES	17,337	19,552
    TOTALS 1 - 3	955,548,	107,248

    I

    II-C-30

    TABLE 19 (Continuedl
    CHARLOTTE COUNTY POPULATION ESTIMATES
    FOR 1991

    Storm	Population Estimate
    Ca Legory    Zone	July         November

    4    Port Charlotte	1,288          1,288
    Shell Creek	174            139
    Acline	604	1,891
    Webb                     1,382	1,347
    Mobile Homes & Recreational.         0              0
    Vehicles, not otherwise in--
    cluded in the above flood
    prone area (Category 5 Area)

    NEW EVACUEES	2,681          3,328
    TOTALS I -- 4	98,229        110,576

    5    North County	0	0
    Webb	36	36
    Mobile Homes	0	0

    NEW EVACUEES	36	36
    TOTALS 1 - 5             98,264        110,612

    TABLE 20
    MOTOR VEHICLE ESTIMATES
    FOR 1991

    Population Estimate
    Storm                              Recreational            Recreational
    Category     Zone	July   Vehicle	November   Veh:i.cle

    I     Myakka River	997	0	1,032	0
    Barrier Islands        6,863	20	7,338	51.
    Cape Haze              600	0          831	0
    Port Charlotte!	10,185	0	10,459            -
    Peace River	3,907	5	4,482	11
    Punta Gorda	6,224	82	7,073	205
    South County           611	-          660         0

    TOTAL ZONE 1	29,387      1.07	31,873        267

    2        Cape Ifaze	3,040	0	3,683	0
    Port Charlotte	4,546	0	4,761	0
    Sthell. Creek	223	0	232	0
    Punta Corda	387	0	421	0
    South County	15	0	15	0

    TOTAL ZONE 2           8,210	0        9,112	0

    ~~~~~~~~~~.~~.y'.~
    II-C-31

    TABLE 20 (Continued)
    MOTOR VEHICLE ESTIMATES
    FOR 1991                                    I

    Population Estimate
    Storm                             Recreational            Recreational
    Category     Zone	July   Vehicle    November   Vehicle

    3        Cape Haze	795	0          804	0
    Port Charlotte         8,962	0       9,712	0
    Shell Creek	343	14	471	36
    Punta Gorda	582	0	677	0

    TOTAL ZONE 3            10,682	14      11,664	36

    4      Port Charlotte	542	0	644	0
    Shell Creek	69	0	70	0
    Acline	636	25	926	62
    Webb	667	0	674	0
    I
    TOTAL ZONE 4             1,913	25        2,314	62

    5      North County	0	0	0	0
    Webb	18	0	18	0

    TOTAL ZONE 5	18	0	18	0

    TOTAL  ALL ZONES         50,210      146      54,980       365

    TABLE 21
    1991 PUBLIC SHELTER CAPACITY
    !
    Storm	Shelter    Evacuating Population    X Population Sheltered
    Category	Space	July	November	July	November

    1	28,354	63,474	72,405	44.7	39.2 -      -
    2	23,838	78,210	87,696	30.5	27. -
    3	19,433	95,548	107,248	20.3	18.1
    4	19,433	98,229	110,576	19.8	18.1
    5	19,433	98,264	110,612	19.8	17.6

    County  wide,  the above figures would represent an  increase  of
    2,001 square feet, or 16.2%.

    Route  improvements  for the next five-year period indicate  some
    improvements will be made to routes exiting the Category 1..zones.
    Using  the  1985-1990 CIP of the  Charlotte  County	Metropolitan
    Planning  Organization  as  a guide,  the  following	significant
    improvements are forecasted:

    (a)	King's Hlighway	4-laning from Harborview to 1-75
    (b)	Pine Street	4-laning from SR 776 to County Line
    (c)	Edgewater	4-laning segments from US 41 to Harbor
    (9 CR 7:7.5 .. : ..   ; 4-laning from San .Cas.a-to.SR,':775' :' '' ";'.' ;., .

    II-C-32

    (e)
    (f)

    (g)
    (i
    )
    4-laning froim Edgewater to US 41
    4-laning from IUS 41 to SR 776
    2-laning from CR 775 to County Line
    2-laIing from US 41 to Taylor Road
    US 41 to 1-75
    Ha arbor
    Toledo Blade
    Winchester
    Jones Loop Ext.
    Kennilworth Blvd.
    TABLE 22
    REVISED CAPACITIES
    New
    Capacity
    Old
    Capacity

    792 (quick)

    924 (quick)

    931 (quick)
    Rou: e
    King's fighway, iiarborview - 1-75
    Pine Street, SR 776 - County Line
    Edgcwater, TIS 41 - Harbor
    CR 775, San Casa - SR 775
    Harbor, Edgewater - US 41
    Toledo Blade, US 41 - SR 776
    Winchester, CR 775 - County Line
    Jones Loop Ext., US 41 - Taylor Rd.
    Kennilworth Blvd., US 41 - 1-75
    2,.346
    1,846'-
    1, 828
    2,800*
    1,828
    2,800*
    1,301
    1,323
    1,346
    *Ideal. Capacity

    Assuming  that  these  improvements are  in  place,  new  shelter
    satisfaction capacities (Table 23), time to clear (Table 24),
    ultimate constricting route (Table 25), exiting route assessments
    (Table 26), and clearance time calculations (Table 27) can be
    made.

    The County is planning to construct five new schools around the
    county between now and 1992.   All of these new projects will (as
    of  now) be at least in the Category III surge  zone,  therefore,
    the assumption is made that all will be useable as shelters.  The
    sizes	of  these  schools can only be estimated and  the  useable
    square	feet in then a further estimation.   As of 1987 based  on
    preliminary school location,  school size and category of  storm,-
    it  is estimated there will be space for 14,000 people (at 20 ftq.-
    ft./person) in these new shelters.

    TABLE 23
    SHELTER SATISFACTION IN CHARLOTTE
    COUNTY_ FOR 1991
    _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
    Per.cent' Met
    July      November
    Category

    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    53. 6
    34.8
    20. 8
    19.8
    1. 9.8
    47.5
    31.6
    18.6
    17.6
    17.6
    Thanks	to	the County's agressive building  program,. the  total
    amount	-of	spac-e will increase :.127%.over 'what it, is. now..  The.:-.
    II-C-33

    TABLE 24
    TIME TO CLEAR, 1991

    JULY              ___ NOVEMBIR
    CATEGORY      ZONE .       RESTRTCTING	INTER-	INTER-            TO COUNTY
    POINT	SLOW	MEDIATE	QUICK	SLOW	MEDIATE	OUICK	LINE

    1	Myakka River	SR 776	1.3	1.]	1.0	1.4	1.1	1.1	0.5

    1.	Barrier ITsland.r	SR 776'	9.3	7.4	6.9	(0.]	8.1	7.5	0.5

    1. Cape lHaze	SR 776	0.6	0.5	0.4	1.1	0.9	0.8	0.5

    1, Por-t. Charlot:te	US 4]	-	4.9	--	5.3	-	0.3

    1	Peace River	US 17	5.5	4.4	4.1	6.7	5.4	5.0	0.3

    1	Punta Gorda	IJS 41	-	3.0	-	-	3.7	-	0.4

    H     1	South County	CR 765	0.8	0.7	0.6	0.9	0.7	0.7	0.8
    H
     2.  Cape Hlaze	CR 771	4.0	3.2	2.9	5.4	4.4         4.0	0.5

    2.; Port Charlotte	US 41	-	1.1.	-	-	11	0.3

    2.	Shell Creek	IIS 17	0.3	0.3	0.4	0 .3.	0.3	0.2

    21	Punta Gorda	US 17	0.6	0.5	0.4	0.6	0.5	0.5	0.3

    2'	South Countty	CR 765	<0.1	<0.]	0.1 < 0.] < 0.1 <	0.1	0.8

    3.[	Cape Haze	SR 776	1.1	0.9	0.8	1.1	0.9  .	0.8	0.4

    3:.f	Port Charlotte	US  1.	-	2.1	-	--	2.3	-	0.2

    3'.' Shell Creek	US 17	0.4	0.3	0.3	0.7	0.6	0.6	0.2

    3.  Punta Gorda       Jones Loop Ext.	-	0.7	--	0.8	-	0.3

    The :.only route representing distiq6t improvement for 1991, would be Jones Loop Extension, which
    will?allow greater access to 1-75 for Punta Gorda residents.  UIowever, Toledo Blade, Winchester,
    str-ee.t and CR 775 all act, to decrease the times shown in the last column.   Improvements will
    still
    be n.&Pded on SR 776, the only route from the Cape Haze area to US 11.

    population growth as estimated by the straight-line process  will
    increase about 18%.  As a result, shelter satisfaction within the
    County will increase.

    Several caveats must be kept in mind:	shelter sizes and useable
    square feet are only early estimates;	school location is planned
    for  Category III areas,  but that could change;  and the  school
    construction program is through 1992 whereas population increase
    is only through 1991.  Therefore, the numbers in Table 23 will. be
    somewhat lower than as shown.

    Because  route  improvements are  not- county-wide,.  traffic  and
    population  increases  can only worsen -evacuation  and  c]learanrce
    ties unless comparable out-of-counLy route improvements are made.
    Using  the  improvements  listed,  there are  route  improvements
    forecasted that improve in-county movement capacities.

    TABLE 25
    ULTIMATE CONSTRICTING ROUTES
    FOR 1991

    _  _   _Jutly____    ____November
    Constricting	Inter-	Inter-
    Category      Route	Slow	mediate	Quick	Slow	mediate	Quick

    1	SR 776	1]1.2	9.0	8.3	12.6	10.1	9.3

    2	CR 771	4.4	3.6	3.3	5.4	4.3	4.0

    3	US 41	-	4.4	-	4.8	-
    ,,

    TABLE 26
    COUNTY EXITING ROUTES
    TITMES
    JULY	NOVEMBER
    SLOW  TNTER-  OUICK   SLOW	INTE"R-  QUITCK
    WMT DIA TE	MIDI TAT1     -
    TOTA T,
    CATEGORY  VEhIITCLES
    LEAVING CO.
    I% OF
    TOTAT, COMITY
    VEIITC LES
    COMBINED CAPACITIES
    SLOW  INTER--  QUTCK
    MED TMTE
    ROUTES
    2,771	2,958	3,036	4.9	4.6

    2,703	2,873	2,914	5..	4.8
    4.5	5.6	5.2

    4.7	5.7	5.4

    6.3	7.4 .. 6.7

    6.2	7.4   6.7
    5.1

    5.3

    6.6

    6.5

    7.3
    I1(a)   I13,703(.J)
    15,504 ()

    l(b)     13,703(J)
    15,504(N)

    2(a)     24,608(J)
    d25,816(N)

    2(b) .   24,608(J)
    25,816(N)

    3(a) -   38,353(J)
    39,418(N)
    46.1

    '16.1
    52.5
    US41l/SR 776

    UJS 4.1/US 17
    65.2    US 41/SR 776
    68.4        CR 74
    3,480
    3,840
    3,933
    7.1   6.4
    H

    I..I
    I-

    I
    LO
    mr
    3,470  3,829   3,980   7.1   6.4
    65.
    2
    68.4

    79.2
    81.4
    UiS 41/US 17/
    Toledo Blade

    T-75/US 41/
    CR 74
    5,130  5,303   5,378   7.5   7.2    .7.I1 ' 7.73
    7.4
    5,110  5,280   5,351   7.5   7.3
    .7.2    7.7   7.5
    7.4
    3(b)      38,353(J)
    39,418(N)
    79.2    1-75/US 41/
    81.4       ST? .7
    I .
    -    m     -    -         - m --                    -         -    -     --  -m

    TABLE 27
    CLEARANCE TIME
    ROUTE-
    TNTE H--
    SLOW   MEDIATE   QUICK
    S U MM ARY
    TNTE,R-
    SLOW   MEDIATE   QUICK

    (J)17.9 (J)16.l  (J)15.5
    (N)18.7 (N)1.6.6 (N)16.O
    CA-TEGORY DESTTNATION(l)
    WP,ATITHER (2)
    ] .
    O  .-,
    08
    (J) 9.1	(J) 7.3	(J1) 6.7
    (N) 9.8	(N) 7.8	(N) 7.2
    2
    0. 0

    k

    8
    (J) 4.1	(J) -.6	(.J) 3.3	(J)M3.2 (J)12.4	J)12.1
    (N) 5.4	(N) 4.3	(N) 4.0	(N)14.2 (N)]3.I	(N)12.8

    (J) 1.1	(J) 4.4	(J) 0.8	(J1) 9.5 (J)12.8	(J) 9.2
    (N) 1.1	(N) 4.8	(N) 0.8	(N) 9.5 (N)13.2	(N) 9.2
    H
    H
    ( I
    I
    Li
    '
    3
    0.4
    (1)	From Tabl'e 13, 14 or 24, whichever is greater

    (2)	From Table 12

    CHARLOTTE COUINTY
    APPENDIX A - PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARDS TIMES

     The  pre-cye  landfall hazard times projected by the SLOSH  model
    appear  in  the  following table.   The  table  consists  of  the
    estimated times for each selected grid point, by storm category
    (1-5)  and	type  of  storm  track  (landfalling,   parallel	arind
    1     crossing).	In all cases, the worst probable times are used.	The
    table  is	divided	into  50 parts,	for  category	1  through  5
    respectively.   The	first  column	names the	grid	point	being
    examined,	followed	by  the  projected- time,	in	hours	before
     estimaLed	eye  landfall,  that tidal flooding would  reach  that
    point.  This time estimate is followed by a code "identifying the
    i    particular  storm track producing this worst  probably  (longest)
     time.	These  coded storm tracks are fully described in Table 1,
    giving	the  track's landfall point and the  area  receivirng  the
    maximum surge and/or winds.   The next column, "Total Duration in
    U    Hours"  lists  the length of time the grid point is projected  to
    experience one foot or more of flooding in a 24-hour period.

     Following these figures, the next column lists the projected
    time, in hours before estimated eye landfall, that sustained gale
    force winds would reach the grid point.   Again, this is followed
    by  the coded storm track producing the worst probable  (longest)
     times,  and the duration each point is expected to experience the
    wind	force during a 24-hour period.   Note that "sustained	gale
    force	winds" regers to winds sustained at over 40 mphti.  In	all
    cases, eye landfall is the reference point used to determine pre-
     eye landfall hazard times.
    1

    I
    I
    APrENDTIX A
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL IfAZARD TIMES
    - CATEGORY 1

    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUlSTA INED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    I
    TOTAT, ,

    :TN
    liRMrRl

    8.5
    - 5I
    8.5
    8.5

    8.
    8.5 1
    8R 5
    8.5
    3.5
    8
    8.51
    8.5 |
    9
    9g
    LANDFALLING
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN TIOURS
    GRID
    STOIM
    POINrTS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING ( 1 )
    STORf
    TRACK
    (70
    (70
    (60
    (75

    (60
    (65
    (75
    (75

    (55
    (75
    (75
    (75
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    Cape EHaze
    Charlotte Co. Line
    Pl acida
    Alligator Creek
    Acline
    Punta Gorda Isles
    US 41 Bridge
    East Punta Corda
    East Grassy Point
    West Iffrbor View
    Alligator Bay
    771 Bridge
    Ainger Creek
    Englewood Beach
    3
    2
    1
    3

    0
    1
    1
    3

    0
    4
    4.5
    4
    12

    10
    '13
    5.5

    5.5
    4.5
    4
    4.5
    4..5
    4
    4.5
    4
    4.5
    5
    5.5
    5.5
    (60 NS)
    (45 NS)
    (55 NS)
    (45 NS)
    (40 NS)
    (55 NS)
    (60 NS)
    (45 "NS )
    (55 N'S)
    (45 NS)
    (55 NS)
    (55 NS)
    (55 NS)
    (55 NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)

    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    7.5
    10
    10
    12

    11.5
    13
    13.5
    13
    LA,NDFALLING
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 2
    HOURS BEFOIRE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WTINDS(2)
    TOTAL
    DItATIl,
    STORM    TIN
    TRACK    HOURS
    GRID
    STORM
    PO INTS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING (1)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DILRATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    10
    I
    10. 5
    10
    10.51
    9.5  -
    9.5
    10   I
    10

    10.5 I

    10.u
    10
    10.5 5
    Cape Haze
    Charlotte Co. Line
    Placida
    Alligator Creek
    Acline
    Punta Gorda Isles
    US 41 Bridge
    East Punta Gorda
    East Grassy Point
    West Ha;lrbor VicJw
    Alligator Bay
    771 Bridge
    Ainger Creek
    Englewood Beach
    4
    2.5
    2.5
    3.5

    1
    1.5
    1.5
    3.5
    - .5
    1
    4.5
    5
    4.5
    (75
    (75
    (70
    (75

    (65
    (70
    (75
    (75
    (60
    (70
    (70
    (75
    (75
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    13
    11.5
    11.5
    12.5
    6.5
    6
    7
    5.5
    5.5
    5.5
    5.5
    5.5
    5.5
    5
    5.5
    6
    6.5
    6.5
    (60 NS)
    (45 NS)
    (6' NS7
    (45 NS)
    (60 NS)
    (60 NS)
    (60 NS)
    (60 NS)
    (60 NS)
    (45 NS)
    (60 NS)
    ,(60 NS)
    (65 NS)
    (65 NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    10
    10.5
    10.5
    12.5
    6
    10
    7.59
    14
    13.5
    (1)  Greatest  time  before  landfall - not necessarily for worst  case  storm;	some
    tracks cause early flooding even though they may not produce highest surge	- if
    more than I track produces same time, the one wit.h the worse surge then chosen.

    (2)  Greatest Lime before landfall - same is true for winds as above for floodingf.
    'm
    2
    I

    APPENDIX A
    LANDFALLING
    PRE--EYE LANDFALL HAUZARD TIMES -- CATEGORY 3
    TOTJRS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL'-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WTNDS(2)

    8
    8
    8.5
    7.5
    7
    7-5
    7
    7
    7.5
    7.
    7.5
    7.5
    8.5
    8.5
    TOTAL
    DURATION
    STORMi	TN
    TRACK	TIOUTRS
    1lOUfRS BEFORE
    EYE  LANDFALL--
    FLOODIN3(1)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS

    POINTS

    Cape Haze
    -Charlotte Co. Line
    *PI ac ida
    Alligator Creek
    Acline
    Punta Gorda Isles
    U TS 41 Bridre
    East Punta Gorda
    Eust Grassy Point
     Jest Hlarbor View
    Alligator Bay
    771 Bridge
    Ainifer Creek
    1~Eng;lewood Beach
    (55
    (55
    (60
    (55
    (40
    (65
    (50
    (55
    (65
    (55
    (65
    (55
    (65
    (70
    1i3.~
    5
    12.5'
    13
    12.5
    3.5
    11
    11.5
    11
    13
    9.5
    11
    14.5
    14.5
    14.5
    4.5
    3.5
    4
    3.5
    -.5
    2
    2.5
    2
    4
    5
    2
    5.5
    5.5
    5.5
    (75
    (75
    (75
    (70
    (45
    (70
    (75
    (70
    (70
    (60
    (65
    (75
    (75
    (75
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NSY
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)

    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS
    )
    NS)
    NS)
    1.35,
    13
    13.5
    13
    13.5
    12.5
    13.5
    13
    13
    13.5
    13
    13.5
    13.5
    13
    LAM) FALLING
    PRE--EYE LANDFALL LhAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 4
    HOURS BEFIORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    TOTAL
    DIJRATION
    STORM     IN
    TRAkCK. IIOURS
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS
    IIOUT?S BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL--
    FLOODING(l)
    TOTAL
    STO RM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HIOURS
    U Cape liaze
    CharlotLe Co. Line

    lacidna
    Alligator Creek
    Acline
    "unta Gorda Isles
    (IS 41 Bridge
    East Punita Gorda
    EasL Grossy Poini
    -West ffarbor View
    'Aligator Bay

    .771. Bridge
    nger Creek
    Fnglewood Beach
    (75 NS)
    (75 NS)
    (75 NS)
    (75 NS)
    (60 NS)
    (75 NS)
    (75 NS)
    (75 NS)
    (75 NS)
    (70 NS)
    (70 NS)
    (75 NS)
    (75 NS)
    (70 NS)
    14
    13
    13.5
    13
    5
    11.5
    12
    12
    13.5
    12.5
    1.3.
    5
    15
    15
    15
    9.5
    9.5
    10
    9
    8.5
    8.5
    8.5
    8.5
    9

    81.5

    9.5

    9
    7.5
    1.0
    (55 NS)-
    (60 --S T
    (60 NS)
    (60 NS)
    (50 NS)
    (50 NTS)
    (55 NS)
    (55 NS)
    (70 NS)
    (60 NS)
    (75 NS)
    (60 N')
    (65 NS)
    (75 NS)
    15 -
    14.5
    15
    .14.5
    14.5
    14.5
    14.5
    11.5
    14.5
    14.5
    14.5
    14.
    5
    15
    1-5

    some
    5
    4
    4.5
    4
    _5
    2.5
    3
    3
    -.1.5

    *1'5

    2.5

    6

    6
    6
    landfall - not necessarily for worst
    (1 )  Grcatest  t.imTe  before
    case storm;
    trac_ks (r-Iuse: carly flood(irig even though they may not produce highest surge  -- if
    I more thin 1 track produces same t(1me, the one with' thc,.worse surge.- then ic-hosen.
    (2)  Greatest time b)efore landfall - saime is true 'for winds as abovce ior flooding.
    3

    I
    APPENDIX A
    I
    LANDFALLING
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 5

    TOTA
    DURATIN
    STORM	IN
    TRACK
    	HOIu
    R|
    HOlRS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL--
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS

    Cape Haze
    Charlotte Co. Line
    Placida
    Alligator Creek
    Aclinc
    Punta Gorda Isles
    US 41 Bridge
    East Punta Gorda
    East Grassy Point
    West IHarbor View
    Alligator Bay
    771 Bridge
    Ainger Crcek
    Englewood Beach
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL--
    FLOODITNG(1)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    (75
    (75
    (70
    (75
    (35
    (75
    (75
    (75
    (75
    (75
    (75
    (75
    (75
    (75
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    (60
    (55
    (55
    (45
    (60
    (60
    (60
    (60
    (60
    (50
    (60
    (65
    (60
    (75
    5
    3.5
    4
    4
    -.5
    2.5
    2.5
    2.5
    ,4.
    5
    2
    2.5
    6
    6
    6
    14
    12.5
    13  '
    13
    .4.5
    '11.5
    11.5
    11.5
    13.5
    10
    11.5
    15
    15
    15
    9.
    8.5
    9
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    7.5
    8
    7.5
    9
    9.5
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    13.5
    13.5 I
    14
    13 5
    13

    13
    13    *

    13.5
    13.5
    13.5 I
    14    3
    13.5
    PARALLEL
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 1

    TOTAI
    DURATITO
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HOUR
    IOTURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DTURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LA;NDFALL-
    FLOODING(I2 )
    -9
    -9
    (60 WS)
    (60 WS)

    (15 wS)
    (15 ES)
    (3.5 ES)
    ( O S).
    ( o- st
    (15 ES)
    (15 ES)
    ( 0 S)
    ( 0 S)
    ( 0 s)
    (15 ES)
    ( 0 S)
    ( 0 S)
    (15 WS)
    (15 WS)
    Cape Haze
    Charlotte Co. Line
    P] acida
    Alligator Creek
    Acline
    Punta Gorda Isles
    US 4] Bridge
    East Punta Gorda
    East Grassy Point
    West Harbor View
    Alligator .ay
    771 Bridge
    Aingfer Creek
    Englewood Beach
    3
    3

    6 :

    .5

    4.5
    7.5
    6.5
    3
    3
    2
    2.5
    4
    3.5
    2
    2
    2
    2.5
    2
    2
    1.5
    1.5
    12
    12.5
    8.5
    8.5
    9
    8.5
    8
    8
    8
    8.5
    8.5
    9
    8.5
    8.5
    I
    I
    I
    I
    -11.5

    -7.5
    -4.5
    -4.5
    (60 WS)

    ( 0 S)
    ( 0 S)
    ( 0 S)
    I
    I
    (1)  Greatest  time  before  landfall - not necessarily for worst
    tracks cause early flooding even though they may not produce
    more than I track prodluces same time, the one with the worse
    case storm; some
    highest surge - if
    surge then chosen.
    !!   (2)  Greatest time before landfall - same is true for winds as above for flooding.
    I
    4
    I

    APPENDIX A
    PARALLEL
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 2
    IHOIRS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    TOTAL
    DIUATION
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HOULRS
    GRID
    STOIM
    POINTS
    IEOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(l)
    TOTAL
    DURATION
    IN fIOURS
    STORMI
    TRACK
    Cape Haze
    CI harlotte Co. Line
    Placida
    Alligator Creek
     Acline
     Punta Gorda Isles
    US 41 Bridge
    East Punta Gorda
    East Grassy Point
    West fHarbor View
    Alligator Bay
    771 Bridge
    Ainger Creek
    Englewood Beach
    -7
    -7
    ( 0 S)
    ( 0 s)
    5
    5

    6. 5
    4.5
    4.5
    3.5
    4
    4.5
    4
    4
    4
    3.5
    3.5
    3.5
    3
    3
    2.5
    (15
    (0
    (0
    (0
    (15.
    (15
    (15
    (15
    ( 0
    (15
    (15
    ( 0
    (
    (
    ES)
    S)
    S)
    S)
    ES)
    ES)
    ES)
    ES)
    S)
    ES)
    ES)
    S)
    S)
    S)
    11
    1.0.5
    1.0.5
    11
    11
    11
    11
    11
    10.5
    10.5
    10.5
    11
    11
    10.5
    --5
    (15 ES)
    12
    12
    -8
    (60 WS)
    (60 WS)
    ( 0 S)
    24
    24
    4
    S)
    S)
    S)
    -7
    -4
    -5
    ( 0
    ( 0
    (0
    5
    8
    7
    PARALLEL
    PRE-EYE TANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 3
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    TOTAL
    DURATION
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HOURS
    GRID
    STORM
    POIN"TS
    IIOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(1)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    Cape Taze
    Charlotte Co. Line
    Placida
    Alligator Creek
    Acl i ne
    Punta Gorda Isles
    US 41 Bridge
    East Punta Gorda
    East Grassy Point
    West lHarbor View
    Al l [gator IBay
    771 Bridge
    Aingier Creek
    Englewood( Beach
    -3.5
    -3.5
    -4
    - -4
    ( 0
    (0
    ( 0
    (15
    S)
    S)
    S)
    ES)
    8.5
    8.5
    8
    8
    6
    6.5
    5.5
    5..
    5
    6
    5.5
    5.5
    5.5
    5
    5
    5
    5
    4.5
    4.5
    ( 0 S)
    ( 0 S)
    ( 0 S).
    ( o-sT
    (15 ES)
    ( 0 S)
    ( 0 S)
    (15 ES)
    (15 ES)
    ( o s)
    (15 ES)
    ( 0 S)
    (15 WS)
    (15 WS)
    14
    14
    14.
    13.5
    14
    13.5
    14
    14
    13.5
    13.5
    13.5
    14
    13.5
    14
    -4.5
    --5
    -5
    -4.5
    --6
    --5
    -5
    --4

    --I
    ( 0  S)
    (o s)
    ( 0	S)
    (0
    	s
    )
    ( 0	S)
    ( 0	S)
    ( 0
    	s
    )
    ( o	S)
    ( 0	s)
    7.5
    7
    7
    7.5
    .5

    7
    8
    I
    (1)  Greatest  time  before  landfal].l - not necessarily for worst
    tracks cause early flooding even though they may not produce
    more than I track produces same time, the one with the worse
    case storm; some
    highest surge - if
    surge then chosen.
    (2)  Greatest time before landfall. - same is true for winds as above for flooding.
    7,:/  '~~       : '    "       '     '     .. .~ .'  '  .:-'.'.:' .'"'� ....... ..( "::.:.:' .:.   ,.
    .........' -- , : .';:;-
    ."   :'' ~ �� �~  .r .   . -  -, ;.
    5

    I
    APPENDIX A
    PARALLEL
    PRE--EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 4
    TOTA
    DURATIN
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HIOURS I
    HOLmS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL--
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    GRID
    STORM
    POI NTS

    Cape HIaze
    Charlotte Co. Li-ne
    Placida
    Alligator Creek
    Acline
    Punta Gorda Isles
    US 41 Bridge
    East Punta Gorda
    East Grassy Point
    West Harbor View
    Alligator Bay
    771 Bridge
    Ainger Creek
    Englewood Beach
    IHOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING( .)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOIRS
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    -5
    -5.5
    -5
    -5.5
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    WS
    )

    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    ws)
    7
    6.5
    ;7
    6. 5.:

    .55
    5
    5
    5.5
    6
    6.5
    6
    6
    5.5
    5.5
    5.5
    5.5
    5
    5
    5
    5
    5
    5
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30.
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    WS
    )
    WI
    S)
    WS
    )
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    wS)
    15.5
    16
    16.5
    16
    15
    15.5
    15.5
    15.5
    15.5
    15
    15.5
    16
    16.5
    1].6.5
    -7
    -7
    -7
    -6.5

    -7
    -6
    -4.5
    -4.5
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30

    (30
    (30
    (60
    (60
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    5
    6
    7.5
    7.5
    I
    PARALLEL - 60 WS ONLY
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 5

    TOTATl
    DURATION
    STORM      IN
    TRACK TIOuns
    TRACK    IIOURS I

    11.5
    11.51
    12.5
    _  '_.  10
    9.5  1
    9.5
    9.5
    9.5

    10.5

    12.5  U
    113
    tIOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WTNDS(2)
    GRID
    STOiRM
    POINTS
    IIOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(l)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOUIRS
    Cape Haze
    Charlotte Co. Line
    Placida
    Alligator Creek
    Acline
    Punta Gorda Isles
    US 41 Bridge
    East Punta Gorda
    East Grassy Point
    West Harbor View
    Alligator Bay
    771 Bridge
    Ainger Creek
    Englewood Beach
    --6.5
    -6.5
    -6.5
    --7
    5.5
    5.5
    3.5
    5
    4
    4
    4
    3
    3
    2.5
    2.5
    2.5
    3
    2.5
    3
    2.5
    3
    3
    -9.5
    -8
    -9
    --8
    2.5
    3.5
    3
    4
    3
    4. .5
    7
    7
    -7.5
    -5
    -5
    I
    (1)  Greatest  time  before  landfall - not necessarily for worst
    tracks cause early flooding even thoughi they may not produce
    Tnnrf_r-+ hflin I  rtz rI rr-nlixr-r.,  fl uroIn   ft%c-- 1 o,i Itr f; tlif Wr!:cf
    case  storm;  somc
    highest surge - if
    urffre ith-obn c-hsexn
    IJUrl j  L IlU �I tL r L.fl jS t U[lJtACt;   bUlillItI  LICU S2   I LICS VIC I            . LiL  LIltI  WtUl. Z,:   Ua AC       LllGll  CIUVoll.-

    (2)  Greatest time before landfall - same is true for winds as above for flooding.

    ';{{':                          .;               .,                                                              . .: ."                                    ;      " ...

    6
    I

    APPENDIX A
    CROSSING

    PRE-EYE LANDFALL  hAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 1

    I OIORS BEFORE,	TOTAL
    GRID	HIOlmS BEFORE	TOTAL	EYE LANDFALL-	DURATION
    STORM	EYE LANDFALL-	STOI1M	DURATION	SUSTAINED GALE	STORM	IN
    POINTS	FLOODING(1)	TRACK	IN HOURS	FORCE WINDS(2)	TRACK	HOURS

    Cape Haze	- .5	(45 NS)	9.5	6	(45 NS)	9
    Charlotte Co. Line	3	(45 NS)	-13	6.-5	(45 NS)	9
    i  Placida	.	5	(45 NS)	9
    Alligator Creek              .5           (45 NS)	10.5'` 6.5	(45 NS)	9.5
    Acline	.	7	(45- NS)	10
    Punta Gorda Isles	6.5	(45 NS)	10
    US  41 Bridge	-1.5	(45 NS)	8.5	6.5	(45 NS)	10
    East Punta Gorda	-1.5	(45 NS)	8.5	6.5	(45 NS)	9.5
    East Grassy Point	- :5	(45 NS)	9.5	6.5	(45 NS)	10
     West Harbor View	6.5	(45 NS)	10
    Alligator B:ay	6	(45 NS)	9.5
    771 Bridge	-2.	(45 NS)	8	5.5.	(45 NS)	9.5
    Ainger Creek	-1	(45 NS)	9	5	(45 NS)	9.5
    Englewood Beach	-2.5	(45 NS)	7.5	4.5	(45 NS)	9

    CROSSING

    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIRES - CATEGORY 2

    3	IIOlUS BEFORE	TOTALT
    GRID	HIOURS BEFORE	TOTAL	EYE LANDFALL-	DURATION
    STORM	EYE,. LANDFALL-	STOIRM	DURATION	SUSTATNED GALE	STORM	IN
    POINTS	FLOODTNG(l)	TRACK	IN HOURS	FORCE WINDSI(2)	TRACK	IHOURS

    Cape Haze	.5	(45 NS)	9.5	7	(30 NS)	12
    Charlotte Co. Line	7.5	(45 NS)	13.5	7.5	(30 NS)	12
    * Placida	6	(30 NS). 11.5
    Alligator Creek            I1             (45 NS)      11	8	(45-NS-	12
    Acline	8	(45 NS)	12
    Punta Gorda Isles	7.5	(45 NS)	11. 5
    US 41 Bridge	-1	(45 NS)	9	8	(45 NS)	12
    East Punta Gorda	-1	(45 NS)	9	8	(45 NS)	3.2
    east Grassy Point	-- .5	(45 NS)	9.5	7.5	(45 NS)	12
    West Harbor View	8	(45 NS)	12
    Alligator Bay	-2	(45 NS)	8	7.5	(45 NS)	12
    77T BridgEe	--2	(45 NS)	8	6.5	(45 NS)	11.5
    i Alner Creek	-I	(45 NS)	9	55.	(15 NTS	11.5
    Erngllewood lter;lch	-2	(45 NS)	8	5.5	(45 NS)	11.5

    (I ) GCreatest  time  ibefore  landfall - not neccessarily for worst	case  storm;	some
    tracks cu:;sc early flooding even thoughl they may not produce highest surge	-- if
    more tlhan I track produces same time, the one with the worse surgec thenr chosen.

    (i2)  CGr-e:tes!: time before l.andfall - same is true for-winds as above for flooding.

    !7

    I
    APPENDIX A
    CROSS INC
    I
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL  hAZARD TIMES -
    CATEGORY 3
    TOT.a1
    DURAT"IN
    STOrI!	IN
    TRACK	O1uRS0
    ,to
    s
    HIOUJRS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS
    HIorms BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(1)
    (45
    (45
    (45
    (45

    (45
    (45
    (45
    (45
    (45
    (45
    (45
    (45
    (45
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)

    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    (45
    (45
    (45
    (45
    (45
    (45
    (45
    (45
    (45
    (45
    (45
    (45
    (30
    (30
    Cape IIaze
    Charlotte Co. Line
    Pl.acida
    Alligator Creek
    Acline
    :Punta Gorda Isles
    US 41 Bridge
    East Punta Gorda
    East Grassy Point
    West Harbor View
    Alligator Bay
    771 Bridge
    Ainger Creek
    Englewood Beach
    0
    4
    -1
    I

    - .5

    -3.5

    -1.5
    - .5
    -1.5
    10
    14
    9
    11

    .9.5
    9
    9.5
    10
    6.5
    9
    8.5
    9.5
    8.5
    6.5
    7
    5.5
    7
    7
    6.5
    7
    7
    6.5
    7
    6.5
    6
    5
    5
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    12
    12
    12
    12.5
    12
    12
    12.5
    12.5
    12.5 I
    13
    12.5
    11,.5
    13
    1.3   1
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    (1) Greatest time before landfall - not necessarily for worst
    tracks cause early flooding even though they may not pr-oduce
    more than 1 track produces same time, thle one with the worse
    case  storm;	some
    highest surge	- if
    surge then chosen.
    (2) Greatest time before landfall - same is true for winds as above for flooding.

    .. 8                ..        ..    -

    8
    II
    I

    SARASOTA COUNTY - TABLE OF CONTENTS
    Section
    Page #
    Hurricane Vulnerability ..............................II-D-1.
    Recent Storm History .................................II-D-2
    Affected Population ..................................II-D-5
    Motor Vehicles .......................................II-D-10
    Shelters .............................................II-D-10
    Routes ..............................................II-D-15
    Clearance Times ......................................II-D-20
    1991 Forecasts ....................... .................II-D-26
    APPENDIX - Hazard Times..............
    I
    LIST OF MAPS
    Map
    Page #
    1. SLOSH Model Storm History Points ..................II-D-3
    2. Maximum Areas Subject to Flooding .................II-D-4
    3. Evacuation Zones ..................................II-D-6
    4.  Red Cross Managed Public Shelter Locations ........II-D-12
    5. Evacuation Routes .................................II-D-16
    6.  Routes Subject to Rainfall Flooding ...............II-D-19
    LIST OF TABLES
    Table
    Page #
    1.
    *
    22.
    3.
    4.

    I ~~~~~ 5
    6.
    7.

    * ~~         ~~ 8

    9.
    10.
    11.
    *
    12.
    13.
    14.
    15.
    16.
    17.
    18.
    I 1           19.
    20.
    21.
    22.
    23.
    24.
    25.
    26.
    .27.
    Predicted Coastal Storm Surges ....................II-D-4
    1987 Housing Units ................................II-D-7
    Seasonal Occupancy Rates ..........................II-D-8
    Population Estimates ..............................II-D-9
    Vehicle Estimates .................................II-D-10
    Shelters ..........................................II-D-11
    Public Shelter Capacity ...........................II-D-13
    Population Displacement Ratio .....................II-D-14
    Shelter Satisfaction ..............................II-D-15
    Evacuation Route Capacity Calculation .............II-D-17  -
    Pre-Landfall Flood Conditions .....................II-D-20
    Shelter Designations and Options ..................II-D-21]
    Time to Clear .....................................II-D-22
    Ultimate Constricting Route .......................II-D-23
    County Exiting Routes .............................II-D-24
    Total Evacuation Time .............................II-D-25
    Housing Units, 1991 ...............................II-D-27
    Population Estimates, 1991 ........................II-D-28
    Motor Vehicle Estimates, 1991 .....................IT-D-29
    Public Shelter Capacity, 1991 .....................11-D-30
    Population Displacement Ratio, 199] ................II-D-30
    Revised Capacities ................................II-D-31
    Shelter Satisfactions, 199] .......................II-D-32
    Revised Time to Clear, 1991 .......................II-D-32
    Ultimate Constricting Route, 1991 .................IT-D-33
    Exiting Routes, 1991 ...............................11-D-34
    Total Time, 1991 .........................-.................I-D-35

    SARASOTA COUNTY
    PEACETIME EMERGENCY PLAN (HURRICANES)
    [9J-5.012(2)(e)(i)]

    HURRICANE VULNERABILITY

    The  hurricane vulnerability of Sarasota County has been analyzed
    using a numerical storm surge prediction model known as SLOSH,
    short for Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges from Hurricanes. This
    model is described in detail in the Regional Hurricane Evacuation
    Plan, 1981-82 prepared by the Southwest Florida Regional Planning
    Council;  as  welI as A Storm Surge Atlas for Southwest  Florida.
    prepared by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
    Undated  (@  1983).   These reports analyzed  some  187  separate
    storms for their potential impact on Southwest Florida, including
    Sarasota   County.    Both  reports  provide  an  assessment   of
    methodologies and provide assumptions that can act towards
    increasing or decreasing forecast flood and wind conditions.
    fowever, in summary, the following assumptions can be made.

    (1) Landfalling storms provide the worst flooding potential

    (2) In general, flooding will be worse south of the eye of the
    hurricane

    (3) Wind conditions causing travel to become unsafe will occur
    well before the eye of the storm makes landfall, and are
    likely to precede flooding of evacuation routes.

    (4) Storm landfall prediction cannot be considered an exact
    science.   An  approaching  storm may strengthen  or  change
    course before making landfall, and these changes will
    decrease or increase rain-flooding and surge potential of
    the storm..                                                 -

    The  SLOSH model used ten points in Sarasota County for	a  time-
    history  analysis.   These  points are depicted on  Map	1.   The
    greatest height of stormwaters for each category storm for each
    point	are	summarized in Table 1.   The storm surge heights	are
    based	on	the Saffir/Simpson Scale of flooding  above  mean	sea
    level.

    .. . ~~~_..�. .  ,. >, .~.A.

    II'-1--

    I
    I
    TABLE 1
    PREDICTED COASTAL STORM SURGES SIMULATED BY SLOSH MODELx
    LANDFALLING STORMS

    (If  a  point is over water,	the surge is reported  in
    feet of flooding above msl;	if a point is on land, the
    surge is reported in feet above land at that point.)*
    I
    ELEVATION
    OF POINT
    STORM CATEGORY
    Z      3       4
    GRID POINT
    1
    5
    Englewood
    Buchanan Airport
    Manasota Key
    South Venice
    Venice Airport
    Venice Groves
    Venice Beach
    Longboat Key
    Ringling Causeway
    Bay Island
    12
    12
    7
    14
    16
    7
    1
    1
    1
    1
    _  w   4
    4
    4
    8
    3
    1
    11
    17
    11
    12
    13

    -	2

    -	2
    6	8
    -	3.5
    -	6
    -	4.6
    4
    9
    3
    1
    11
    16
    9
    10.6
    11
    5

    7
    13
    5.8
    8.3
    7.5
    *See Map 1 for grid point locations.

    The SLOSH model also provided maps of the flooding that may be
    expected in Sarasota County. The 187 different simulations [from
    the Tampa Bay and Charlotte Harbor SLOSH Models have been
    summarized by flood category, and a zone for each category has
    been created depicting the maximum extent of flooding resulting
    from  all  of the storms of that category.    The five zones  thus
    created are depicted on Map 2.
    I
    I
    I
    Although hurricanes cannot be accurately forecast in regard to
    behavior, the SLOSH simulations provided insights into the
    differences in pre-landfalI flooding for landfalling, paralleling
    and crossing storms. These differences are summarized in Table 2
    for storm eye lecation and points of worst impact.

    . .            I
    .I
    U
    Appendix 1 summarizes the pre-eye landfall hazard times that the
    County may experience.
    I
    I
    I
    I
    Recent Storm Hlistory

    As in the rest of the Southwest Florida Region, Sarasota County
    has suffered no direct hit from a hurricane since Donna in 1960.
    However,  the County did come under the fringe of Hlurr:icane Elena
    in  1985.   Elena  caused  some wave erosion  along  the  varrier
    islands, and flooding of the back bay area along Blue Heron
    Drive. Most hard hit was the area south of Stickney Point and
    west  of Midnight Pass Road.   Building on the affects of  Elena,
    tropical storm Juan caused serious structural damage to shoreline
    areas of the county (also in 1985).	Most of the damage from Juan
    occurred   on  the  middle  portion	of  Longboat  Key,   in  the

    II-D-2
    U

    -
    - Kl- --    - -  m
    A 8 -
    -  m  sramm    im
    A  STORM HISTORY POINTS

    1 ENGLEWOOD
    2 'BUCHANAN AIRPORT
    3  MANASOTA KEY
    H	4 -VENICE GROVES
    H	5	VENICE AIRPORT
    1	6	SOUTH VENICE
     7	VENICE BEACH
    8	LONGBOAT KEY
    9	SARASOTA
    10 NORTH SIESTA KEY

    NOTE: FLOOD HEIGHTS
    AT SHORELINE

    F,	5 FOOT	CONTOUR  L

    O	1	2  3	4  5 MILES

    SWFRPC, DEC 87- RNC
    .,
    MAP 1
    SARASOTA COUNTY
    SLOSH MODEL STORM HISTORY POINTS

    H
    H

    -
    w~~~~~~~,
    I
    0    I 3? 4?    5 MILES  I.
    MAP2
    SWFRPC e7-RNC
    SARASOTA COUNTY
    MAXIMUM AREAS'SUBJECT TO FLOODING
    -            -       - I   1   I  BD aTORM C'AEGqAY  -    -   -   -

    northwestern portion of Sarasota County.   Between them,  the two
    storms destroyed about 990 feet of bulkheads,  as well as several
    single-family homes.

    The more southerly barrier islands in Sarasota County all
    sustained some damage from Elena and Juan.   The most significant
    damage  was the destruction of beachfront  roads.	Three-hundred
    feet	of road was damaged on Siesta Key by Juan.	Elena	wrecked
    about	115 feet of bulkhead on Siesta Key.   Along	the	island's
    southwest coast, both storms destroyed a total of 200 feet of
    bulkhead.

    Elena  closed over 2,500 feet of road onCasey  Key.   After  the
    road was repaired, Juan destroyed it again. In Venice, over 400
    feet of seawalls were destroyed by Juan and about 200 feet were
    wrecked  by Elena.   Elena destroyed over 1,000 feet of  road  on
    Manasota Key,  as well as a 150 foot wooden bulkhead.  No loss of
    3life was sustained in Sarasota County from either storm.

    Earlier this year, on October 16, 1987, Hurricane Floyd provided
    what amounted to an evacuation exercise for Sarasota County.
    Because of Floyd's change of course in the Florida Keys, Sarasota
    County experienced only heavy rains and strong winds.

    No  evacuations  occurred in the County  during  Juan.   However,
    Elena  required the evacuation of 37,000 persons from Category  1
    areas. About 6,500 of these people stayed in County shelters.

    3       Affected Population

    The zones depicted on Map 2 encompass large segments of the
    I
    County population. For planaing purposes, any remaining
    population in the county, landward of Zone 5, is placed in Zone
    5  to	represent a "total evacuation" scenario for	any  purpose.
    Each	zone  has  some vulnerability to the threat	of	hurricane-
    related  tidal- flooding.   All zones are  likely	to	experiencc:
    hurricane-force winds. Category 1 zones are the most vulnerable,
    and  are  likely to be affected by every-hurricane.   Category  5
    zones are the least vulnerable, although the potential for
    evacuation does exist, and are unlikely to evacuate during a
    storm event.

    Each zone is an attempt to mimic the storm-surge coastline of the
    county.   }lowever, these zones are too large to accurately assess
    the timing and shelter needs of the population. Consequently, in
    association with the Sarasota County Disaster Preparedness, and
    the Sarasota-Manatee Area Transportation Service (SMATS), new
    subzones	were  created for the County floodprone  areas.   These
    subzones	were created in accordance with local place  names  and
    areas, wherever possible, but they should not be considered to
    represent  specific  communities or  neighborhoods.   Rather  the
    subzones identify areas of the county which are generally
    I
    recognized  by a particular place-name. - These  communities  are
    shown on Map 3 . 7 "
    II-D-5

    SARASOTA
    DAYFRONT

    LONG BOAT
    KEY I

    SI ESTA
    KEY I

    ~. INLAND2

    VENICE/OSPRE

    EV~NANDUATION ZONE

    -   -   --rn-rn--   rn  rn                               -  rn  -   --   rn
    rn~~~NORHPOR

    -  -  -   - - - m -    m m m -

    TABLE 2
    SARASOTA COUNTY - HOUSING UNITS
    Multi-Fami l
    Condo
    St orm
    Category
    Hotel-
    Motel
    Residential
    Single-Family
    Mobile Recreational
    lIome    Vehicle
    Apartment
    Zone
    Duplex
    Total
    ].
    1
    I:;
    I
    1-
    1'
    1
    1,625
    1,539
    380
    260
    1,943
    804
    3,018
    3, 196
    0
    0
    0
    0
    0
    1
    4
    0
    5,384
    6,190
    422
    1
    0
    92
    305
    3,746
    Longboat Key
    Siesta Key
    Casey Key
    Manasota Key
    Myakka Floodplain
    Englewood Bayfront
    Venice Osprey
    Sarasota Bayfront
    286
    0
    0
    0
    2,313
    1,199
    226
    333
    106
    797
    146
    45
    109
    80
    121
    506
    62
    2
    0
    0
    0
    2
    4
    0
    1,133
    91
    26
    0
    0
    29
    65
    68
    8,596
    8,619
    974
    306
    4,365
    2,207
    3,743
    7,849

    TOTALS     FLOOD ZONE 1	12,765        4,357	5	1,910        16,140	70        1,412	36,659

    2     Myakka Floodplain	1,902             0	0	131             0	0	73	2,106
    2          Inland	8].0	7,701	107	781	3,410	408	348	13,565

    TOTALS     FLOOD ZONE 2	2,712	7,701	107	912	3,410	408	421	15,671

    3.	Myakka Floodplain	429	197	0	13	1,195	0	0	1,834
    3	North Port	2,647	865	0	35             9 :	0	0	3,556
    3          Inlanrd	3,904	2, 181	426	652         5,050      522	521	13,256
    ~~-------------- -----e- -------------- ----------------------------- ------------------_---______________ - ---------- - -
    TOTALS	FLOOD ZONE 3	6,980	3,243	426	700	6,254	522	521.	18,646

    4:.	FLOOD ZONE 4	6,472	1,529	2	1,141	2,652	150	1,130	13,076
    - , .	.            -
    H
    H

    -.d
    5:-:    FLOOD ZONE 5	31,820	2,403	1,142	1,622	4,737	1,030	213	42,967

    . TOTAl, LL ZONES	60,749	19,233	1,682	6,285	33,1C3	2,180	3,697	127,019

    I
    i

    The first step in estimating Sarasota County population was to
    estimate  the  number of dwelling units in  the  county,  and  to
    locate  these units in the various subzones.   Using  information
    from the County, the City of Sarasota, the City of North Port,
    and SMATS; as well as information provided by the Florida
    Department of Community Affairs,  it was determined that Sarasota
    County  contains 136,049 dwelling units.    This estimate includes
    single-family  homes,  duplexes (and multi-plexes) mobile  homes,
    RVs (or travel trailers),  apartments,   condominiums,  hotels and
    motels.	The largest number of dwelling units in the County  are
    located	in Category 5 areas (42,967),' .)ut 31,584 dwelling units
    occur in the Category 1 zone.   This information is contained  in
    Table 2, Housing Units.

    A  population estimate is derived from the housing unit estimate.
    This derivation requires knowledge of two additional factors:
    persons per household and occupancy rates.    For Sarasota County,
    it has been estimated that there is an average of 2.2 people	per
    household.    This  assumption  is regardless of the type of	unit
    (e.g. duplexes vs. mobile homes).

    A   more   detailed   analysis   was   required   to    determine
    occupancy/vacancy rates because this may vary between structure
    types.    It  is also necessary to be somewhat more accurate	withl
    these	rates because some structures are more vulnerable to	wind
    damage	than others.    Using estimates derived from the survey in
    Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan, Appendix C,  two estimates of
    seasonal vacancy were prepared, as indicated in Table 3, below.

    TABLE 3
    SEASONAL OCCUPANCY RATES

    UNIT TYPE             JULY       NOVEMBER

    Single=Family	96%	97%
    Duplex	96%	95%
    Condominium (Conventional) 51%	64%
    Mobile Home	43%	75%
    Travel Trailer	18%	41%
    Apartment	70%	78%
    I
    Motel/Hlotel                 54%           63%
    In 1987,  it is estimated that Sarasota, population in July withi.n
    tihe  5  zones  is	203,081,  and the population  in	November  is
    230,093.   Table	4 summarizes this  information.	The	greatest
    seasonal variance occurs in Hurricane Category Zone 1,	which has
    53,960 persons in July and 62,540 in November, for an increase of
    15.9%.
    "'~:                   '.13"
    ."'....~ ..: ,:.:~/.'.:~..'
    .....:' '' I
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.
    ~.
    .CI.. -..~  !
    W

    TABLE 4
    I                  ~~~~SARASOTA COUNTY POPULATION ESTIMATES
    FOR EVACUATION ZONES

    |I     Storm	Population Estimate
    Category         Zone	July	November

    *     1	Longboat Key	11,384	13,403
    *	Siesta Key	11,534	13,498
    Casey Key	1,533	1,692
    Manasota Key                    619	.  633
    I             Myakka Floodplain	.6,460	8,150
    Englewood Bayfront	3,098	4,006
    Venice/Osprey	7,204	7,552
    I|    ~ Sarasota Bayfront	12,128	13,606
    Mobile Homes, not otherwise	14,735	26,059
    included in above flood-
    prone areas (Category 2-S Areas)

    SUBTOTAL	68,695	88,599

    U      2     Myakka Floodplain	4,306	4,385
    Inland	15,342	22,009
    Mobile Homes, not otherwise	7,408	13,255
    included in above flood-
    prone areas (Category 3-5 Areas)
    ---------------------------------------------------------------
    NEW EVACUEES	12,321	13,590
    I9     ~ TOTALS 1 - 2	81,016	102,189

    3       South Myakka	2,453	2,946
    North Port	6,473	7,149
    Inland	18,869	22,356
    Mobile Homes, not otherwise	4,708	7,520
    included in above flood-
    I         prone areas_(Category 4-5 Areas)                             _ -

    NEW EVACUEES	25,095	26,716
    i	TOTALS 1 - 3	106,111	128,905

    4	Inland	32,508	23,908
    I
    Mobile Homes, not otherwise          2,725        4,995
    included in above flood-
    prone area (Category 5 Area)

    I             NEW EVACUEES	19,525	21,383
    TOTALS 1 - 4	125,636	150,288

    I      5       Inland	80,170	84,805

    NEW EVACUEES	77,445	79,805
    3             TOTALS 1 - 5	203,081	230,093
    II-D-9

    !

    Motor Vehicles

    The vast majority of evacuating persons will travel by a private
    motor vehicle.   Thus,  it is important to estimate the number of
    vehicles likely to be used in an evacuation. Certain factors for
    each household must be taken into account in order to derive a
    county-wide vehicle estimate.  How many vehicles does the average
    Sarasota family own?  Will some of these vehicles be left behind?
    How many drivers feel competent to operate a vehicle under  storm
    conditions?   Would families separate themnselves into two or more
    vehicles?	The	original survey,  as mentioned above,  suggested
    that  about	75%	of county-based vehicles.would be  used	in	an
    evacuation.	This  averages,  over  the entire  region,	to	1.1
    vehicles per household.                                                      |

    Using  these figures,  and the vacancy rates  already  discussed,
    Sarasota  County evacuees would use include 101,545  vehicles	in
     July  and 115,047 vehicles in November.   The greatest number	of
    vehicles (40,087 - 42,401) are in Category 5 areas, but these are
    unlikely to evacuate. The greatest number of evacuating vehicles
    is likely to be in Category 1 zones (26,983 in July and 31,272 in            |
    November).

    Table 5 summarizes vehicle information for Sarasota County.

    TABLE 5
    SARASOTA COUNTY VEHICLE ESTIMATES FOR EVACUATION - BY SEASON

    RECREATIONAL            RECREATIONAL
    CATEGORY     ZONE	JULY    VEHICLES	NOVEMBER    VEHICLES

    1	Longboat Key	5,692	0	6,701	0
    1	Siesta Key	5,768	0	6,749	0
    1	Casey Key	765	0	846	0
    1	Manasota Key	311	0	317	0
    1	Myakka F-loodplain  3,230	0	4,075	0 _-_.
    1	Englewood Bayfront 1,550	1	2,004	1
    1	Venice/Osprey	3,602	1	3,777	2
    1	Sarasota Bayfront	6,065	0	6,803	0

    2	Myakka Floodplain	2,153	0	2,192	0
    2	Inland 2	7,671	21	11,003	48

    3	South Myakka	1,226	0'	1,473	0
    3	North Port	3,236	0	3,574	0             I
    3	Inland	9,435	84	11,178        192

    4	Inland	10,754	1	11,954          1

    5	Inland	40,087     226	42,401        515

    Shelters

    Evacuees  must have a place to" o.   The SWFRPC undertook surveys
    in  1979 and 1981 to determine evacuees' preferred  destinations.
    II-D-10

    These surveys revealed the following information:   24% of  those
    surveyed preferred to go to a public shelter; 34% said they would
    leave the county; 21% would go to "other" locations (friends,
    relatives, hotels, etc.); while 21% had not determined where they
    would go during an evacuation.

    It must be mentioned that these are declarations before the fact,
    and  that actual destinations might be different.   Severity  and
    route of impending storms may also affect destinations, because
    of  pressures	placed  on	roads	and  facilities by  large-scale
    evacuations.	This  could	have	the effect  of  eliminating  or
    limiting  the 21% "don't knows" and/or the 21% "other  locations"
    preferences.

    Currently, Sarasota County has 30 public shelters, one of which
    (Sarasota Vocational Center) has been designated a special care
    facility.   Shelter  capacity  is computed at 20 square feet  per
    person,  for a total capacity of 20,095 persons.   Table 6  lists
    the   shelters,   while  Table  7  summarizes  shelter  space  by
    vulnerability zone. Map 4 depicts shelter locations.

    TABLE 6
    SARASOTA SHELTERS
    Capacity
    at 20 sq. ft.
    per perspn
    Shelter
    Address
    Sarasota Area
    American Legion Post #30
    Ashton Elementary School
    Ashton Mennonite Church
    Bahia Vista Mennonite Church
    Booker School Complex
    Church of the Incarnation
    Concordia Lutheran Church
    First Christian Church
    Fruitville Elementary School
    Gocio Elementary School
    Gulf Gate Elementary School
    McIntosh Middle School
    Sahib Temple
    Saint Wilfred's Episcopal
    Church
    Sarasota Christian School
    Sarasota Family YMCA
    Sarasota fligh School
    Sarasota Middle School
    Sudakoff Conference Center-
    USF
    The Tabernacle
    Tuttle Elementary School
    VFW Post #3233
    'ilkinson Elementary- chool
    6th Street
    Ashton Road
    Ashton Road
    Bahia Vista
    N. Orange Avenue
    Bee Ridge Road
    Wood Street
    S. Washington Blvd.
    Honore Avenue
    Gocio Road
    Lockwood Ridge Road
    S. McIntosh
    N. Beneva Road

    Wilkinson Road
    Bahia Vista
    S. Euclid Avenue
    S. Washington Blvd.
    S. School Avenue
    200
    1,050
    200
    660
    1,420
    300
    200
    300
    480
    1,050
    500
    1, 950
    300
    300
    400
    825
    1,010
    1,700
    N. Tamiami Trail	48
    DeSoto Road	300
    N. Brink Avenue	900
    S. Tuttle Avenue   ..240              ........
    Wilkinson' Ro'a:"d    ....  ' .900 .
    II-D-11

    SHELTERS                              1,	L----2.jIi2
    59CBB0tn AeEB                                                               \ ,,	B	UP TO 14 FEET
    1,	AHERICAN LEBOIONH POST /30	._	ABOVE   MSL
    2.	ASHTON ELEMENBHTARY SCHOOL
    3.	ASHTON MENHONITE CHURCH
    4'.' BAHIA VISTA HENHONITE CHURCH                                                   SR 72
    5:'	BOOKER SCHOOL COMPLEX
    6.	CHURCH OF THE IHCARNATION
    7.	CONCORDIA LUTHERAN CHURCH
    8.	FIRST CHRISTIAN CIIURCH
    9.;.	FRUITVILLE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
    10.	GOCIO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
    11.	GULF OATE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
    12.	MCINTOSH MIDDLE SCHOOL
    13.	SAHIB TEMBHPLE
    14.	SAINT NILFRED'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH
    H	15.	SARASOTA CHRISTIAN SCHOOL
    H	16.	SARASOTA FAMILY UMCA
    17..-	SARASOTA HIGH SCHOOL                                                    \
    Ut      18,	SARASOTA MIDDLE SCHOOL                 '     .
    19g.	SUDAKOFF CONFERENCE CBENTER-USF
    O
    20.	THE TABERNACLE
    t)      21,	TUTTLE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL                    C                                                �
    22".	VYW POST #3233             .
    23:	WILKINSON ELEMENTARY SCIIOOL                4r                                                                                                                W
    VeSDIEH   Osersr� r nd Meko is Arc5                                                                                          'I\.
    24.	CHRIST UNITED HETIIODIST CiURCH 2
    25,	TRINITY UNITED PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH  /                                                                                   29
    26.	VENICE AREA MIDDLE SCHOOL
    27.	VENICE UNITSD CHURCII OF CIIRIST
    28.	VFn 18118                                          O

    Enecw_ood and North Port Atef|
    29	NORTH PORT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL                                                                                         \2CHARLOTTE
    CO.

    30,.	SARASOTA VOCATIONAL CENTER  .S775

    :	"       O  1  2   3  4   5  MILES
    "~ I,~c-~t--MAP 4
    SWFRPC 87-RNC   .                                       SARASOTA COUNTY
    PUBLIC SHELTER LOCATIONS ,

    TABLE 6 (continued)
    SARASOTA SHELTERS
    Capacity
    at 20 sq. ft.
    pe pe_rso_n
    Shelter
    Address
    3            Venice, Ospr�Ey. and Nokomis Area
    Christ United Methodist
    Church                        Center Road
    Trinity United Presbyterian
    ~*      Church	SR 775
    Venice Area Middle School	Center Road
    Venice United Church of
    |   ~ Christ	Shamrock
    VFW #8118	E. Venice Avenue
    220

    220
    1,950

    220
    240

    1,580
    Englewood and North Port Area
    North Port Elementary School Glenallen Blvd.
    COUNTY TOTAL: 29 shelters

    Special Care Facility*
    Sarasota Vocational Center
    CAPACITY: 20,095 persons
    Beneva Road
    700
    This  facility  is  available  only  to  citizens  requiring
    medical, transportation, or other special assistance.

    TABLE 7
    PUBLIC SHELTER CAPACITY
    PERCENT MET
    JULY    NOVEMBER
    EVACUEES
    JULY    NOVEMBER
    CATEGORY
    SPACE
    |   ~Tropical Storm 20,095	25,070	29,226	80.2	68.8
    1      _ 20,095	68,695	88,599	29.3	22.7 _
    2	20,095	81,016	102,189	24.8	19.7
    3	20,095	106,111	128,905	18.9	15.6
    4	20,095	125,636	150,288	16.0	13.4
    5                --------------N/A--------------------

    3    For  lower  category storms,  public shelter demand  is  not  the
    largest  means of meeting evacuee shelter needs.	Because of the
    narrowness  of the Category 1,  2,  and 3 zones on	the  Sarasota
    I    coast, most evacuees from these types of hurricanes can go inland
    to  friend's/relative's  homes,  or  hotel/motel  rooms.   Public
    shelter capacity is most likely to become severely stressed only
     in  storms of Category 3 or  greater.   However,  this  statement
    *    assumes  that evacuees from other counties (into Sarasota  County
    shelters) are light.   If large numbers of non-residents required
    I	sheltering  in Sarasota County,  then the shelter capacity of the
     ,	County might quickly prove inadequate.

    TTh(  only	"non-publbic"	shelter space which	can	be  accurately
    3    assessed	is  that  in	hotel/motel rooms.	This	space  can  be
    II-D-13

    I
    I
    estimated  from  Table  2.   In Sarasota  County,  there  are  an
    estimated 3,697 hotel/motel rooms. The greatest portion (38.2%)
    of the rooms are located on the shoreline or are in the Category
    1  storm	surge  zone.	This leaves 2,285 units available  in  a
    Category	1  storm.   In	a Category 2	storm,  1,864	units  are
    available	and  in a Category 3  storm,	1,343.   In	Category  4
    storms, only 213 units are available.

    The  2,285 units,  at 100% occupancy,  would satisfy only 7.3% of
    the demand for shelter space in July and 5.7% in November for a
    Category  1 storm.   In Category 2 storms,  the  availability	of
    commercial  hotel/motel  space would provide shelter for 5.1%	in
    July and 4.0% in November.   In Category 3 storms,  this falls to
    2.8%  in July and 2.3% in November.   Category 4 storms less than
    one-half of one percent would be able to use commercial hotel/
    motel space as shelter.

    In summary, this public and commercial hotel/motel shelter space
    meets this much of county evacuee needs:
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    = 100%  July, 86.0% November
    1 = 36.6% July, 28.4% November
    2 = 29.9% July; 23.8% November
    3 = 21.7% July; 17.9% November
    4 = 16.5% July; 13.9% November
    5 =             N/A --
    Tropical Storm
    Storm Category
    Storm Category
    Storm Category
    Storm Category
    Storm Category
    I
    I
    Without public or private commercial space available, evacuees
    have only the options of (a) staying with friends who are in
    safer areas within the county or (b) leaving the county for areas
    of the state expected to be less affected by the hurricane.
    "Friends"  can only provide limited shelter space.   The  shelter
    capacity for those staying with friends decreases as the ratio of
    evacuees to those not affected increases.
    TABLE 8
    POPULATION DISPLACEMENT RATIO
    ___POPULATION    ____
    ISLACED_              NOT DISPLACED_ __NOT
    JULY    NOVEMBER   JULY    NOVEMBER
    _RATIO___
    JULY NOVEMBER
    CATEGORY
    Tropical
    Storm
    1.
    2
    3
    4
    5
    25,070	29,226	178,011	200,867	0.1	0.1
    68,695	88,599	134,386	141,494	0.5	0.6
    81,016	102,189	122,065	127,904	0.7	0.8
    106,111	128,905	96,970	101,188	1.1	1.3
    125,636	150,288	77,445	79,805	1.6	1.3
    -------------------- N/A --------------------------
    I
    Sarasota County is in an enviable position in this regard.
    Because of the presence of a "ridge" that roughly parallels US
    Highway 41, a large portion of the population will not be
    displaced in a Category 1 through 3 hurricane.	Only in Category
    5  storms  does displacement bec6me a' problem.	In a Category  5
    storm, only 3.9% will find shelter available with friends.
    II-D-14
    I
    I
    I

    �      Irrespective	of  the	above displacement  figures,	there  is  a
    shortage   of	shelter	space  in  the   County.	The   shelter
    satisfaction within the County is summarized in Table 9 below.

    TABLE 9
    SHELTER SATISFACTION WITHIN THE COUNTY

    Percent Met
    Storm Category	July         November

    Tropical Storm	100.0	99.0
    1	49.6	41.4
    2	42.9	36.8
    3	33.4	27.9
    4	24.6	20.7
    5                          N/A �

    U      Without  being  able  to meet shelter needs  in  the  County,  an
    outside resource is required.   That leaves only alternative (b),
    leaving  the  county,  as a viable course of  action.   For  this
    U      reason, a knowledge of routes and route capacities is essential.

    Routes

    Arterial	roadways form the backbone of any hurricane  evacuation
    effort.	Sarasota  County's roadway system provides many options
    for evacuees  coming from the coast.   While there  may  be  some
    difficulty in evacuating the barrier islands, the County's narrow
    flood zones lessen the problem of widespread coastal evacuations.
    County	evacuation routes are shown in Map 5.   Identification of
    routes	is the first step in assessing the roadway	system.	The
    next  step is assessing roadway capacities.	The	capacities	of
    these    roadways   have   been   developed	based   on    their
    characteristics, tied to the assessment methodologies of the
    Highway CapaciLy Manual, 1985. These capacities are contained irn-
    Table 10.

    3      An  important aspect of any route is its condition.   Many routes
    along the shore are low lying.   Their propensity to flood due to
    surge or tidal action causes their reliability to operate as a
    i      route  to cease several hours before storm landfall.   Appendix 1
    depicts these possibilities.   In most cases, however, winds, not
    shoreline flooding, will initially make.roads unsafe for travel.

    Rainfall flooding,  however,  may constitute a greater hazard  to
    evacuation route operation than either early shoreline flooding
    or  early winds.   This is because roadways may flood and  become
    partially  or  totally impassible early in an  evacuation.   Such
    areas have been documented for different storms and are depicted
    on  Map  6.   These  are  areas that must be  passed  before  the
    presupposed onset of heavy rains, which is eight hours before eye
    landfall.   This is relevant for Category I storms for most areas
    o~ Sarasot'a County axdi for 'fewer areas f.r-'CatgOry:'~'    gat'i:'.'
    storms.
    II-D-15

    H

    H
    SWFRPC 87-RNC
    MAP'S
    SARASOTA COUNTY
    EVACUATION ROUTES
    -~~~~~~~ m -              m          m m

    -  -I I    m    /    /    /    /    /    m    /    /     I    / /       /
    TABLE 10
    EVACUATION ROUTE CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
    SARASOTA COUNTY
    PER-
    CENT NO
    PASSING
    ZONES
    MAXIMIJUM
    IRLY. FLOW/
    FLOW RATE
    (LOS D)
    LANE
    # OF   WIDTII
    LANES I(FT.)
    DESIGN
    SPEED
    (MPIT)
    TRAFFIC FLOW SPLIT
    50/50  70/30  90/10
    IIIGIIWAY
    TYPE
    ROUTE
    1-75
    ManaLee Co. to SR? 68]
    (Venice Connector)
    SR 681 (Venice Connector)
    to Charlotte Co.
    6     12     70      Freeway
    3,647

    2,432
    4         1]2
    70     Freeway
    SR 681 (Venice Connector
    1-75 to US 41

    US 41
    Manatee Co. to US 301
    JUS 301 to Proctor Rd.
    Proc.Lor Rd. to SI? 775
    SR 775 to Charlotte Co.
    4     12      70      Freeway
    2,491
    4	12	60
    6	12	60
    4	12	70
    4	12	70
    Sub. Div.
    Sub. Div.
    Sub. Div.
    Rur. Div.
    1,828
    2,-742
    1, 997
    2,317.
    US 301
    Manatee Co. to 17th St.
    17th St. to US 41
    4	12	70	Sub.Div.
    4	12	50	Sub.Div.
    2,135
    1,687
    SR 39 (Toledo Blade Blvd.)
    1-75 to Charlotte Co.

    SR 789
    Manatee Co. to St. Armands
    Key,
    St. Armands Key to US 41

    SR 7S0: (Fruitville Road)
    US 30]1 to 1-75
    San Cnarlos Blvd. to
    Sllummer]in Rd.
    2      12       60
    80
    1,162
    775
    965   1,045
    2	12	50
    4	12	50
    l
    100
    1,535
    1,786
    768
    956  1,036
    Sub. Div.
    2     t 1.2
    60
    90
    1,248
    751
    936  1,014
    4     12      60    Sub.Div.
    1,941

    V.
    TABLE 10 (CONTINUED1
    EVACUATION ROUTE CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
    SARASOTA COUNTY
    PER-
    CENT NO
    HIGIWAY	PASSING
    TYPE	ZONES
    MAXIMUM
    HRLY. FLOW/
    FLOW RATE
    (LOS D)
    LANE
    # OF IWIDTII
    LANES (FT.)
    DESIGN
    SPEED
    (MPtI)
    TRAFFIC FLOW SPLIT
    50/50  70/30- 90/10
    ROUTE
    SR 775
    US 41 to Charlotte Co.
    2      12       60
    100
    1,325
    744
    927  1,004
    SR 777 (South River Rd.)
    US 41 to SR 775

    SR 72 (Clark Road)
    US ..41 to 1-75
    1-75 to Myakka River
    Myakka River to Desoto Co.
    2	12	60

    2	12	60
    2	12	60
    2	9	60
    80
    1, 045

    1,371
    1,343
    913
    697

    770
    754
    513
    868

    960
    940
    639
    940

    1, 040
    1,018
    692
    90
    80
    80
    SR 758
    StiCkney Point Rd. to US 41 2
    1,489
    12       50
    100
    745
    927  1,005
    The Pealc IIour Factor was assumed to be .95 and the Driver Population Factor
    was assumed to be .75 in ALL cases
    ,NOTE:
    I
    / -': /                    _  _   _                        I            -                     _  /            _-         _      -     _      _ _

    mm     m -  -   m mm m     mm mm -m

    AlAtbee
    Form Rd.
    H~                                                Venice  Ave.

    Center Rd.
    Jacaranda
    'L             ~~~~~~~~Blvd            E

    "C HAR CO'Fl

    SR775

    ::':.  C~~~~~~~g             Mo~Mnaso     asP"

    .O_J_j'4M   ILES
    SWFRPC 87-RNC
    MAP6
    ~i  I  SARASOTA COUNTY
    ROUTES SUBJECT TO RAINFALL FLOODING

    !

    Clearance Times

    There  are  several  factors involved  in  calculating  community
    clearance time. The first is the nature of the threat. Although
    there are no assurances that the County cannot be struck by
    Category 4 and 5 storms,  the probabilities of this are low.  The
    County does, however, lie subject to Storms of Category 1, 2, and
    3  strength  in  decreasing  probability.   With  each  storm  of
    increasing strength, the number of persons and vehicles also
    increases."

    Other  factors  contributing to clearance time are the number  of
    vehicles	evacuating  and  the  capacity  of  roadways  to  carry
    evacuees.	This translates into a number of hours it will take to
    move persons past any given point.

    The final factors are the number and distance of 'stopping"
    opportunities  offered  evacuees,   and  the  distance	to	these
    opportunities.   If  stopping  opportunities are only	ten	miles
    inland, the time is much less for an evacuation than if they are
    100 miles distant.

    These   factors  compose  the  evacuation  time.    For	certain
    communities  within the County, times are less than for	others.
    This  variation is because pre-landfall flood conditions are  not
    as  bad,   shelter  locations  are  closer,  and  better  quality
    evacuation routes are available. Table 11 summarizes pre-landfall
    flood conditions, Table 12 summarizes shelter distances and
    options, and Table 13 summarizes the time it takes to clear the
    most  restrictive point on the route for each community for  each
    of the slow, intermediate, and quick responses.

    TABLE 11
    PRE-LANDFALL FLOOD CONDITIONS

    TIME TO
    COMMUNITY   CATEGORY   COASTAL FLOOD    RAINFALL	WIND

    Longboat Key	1	6.0	8	5.5
    Siesta Key	1	6.0	8	5.5
    Casey Key	1	6.0	8	5.5
    Myakka Flood-	1	-	8	5.5
    plain
    Inland	1              -	8         5.5
    Myakka Flood-	2	8
    plain
    Inland           2              -              8         6.5
    I
    Myakka Flood-   3               -              8         8.0
    plain
    North PorL	3	-	8	8.0
    Inland	3	-	8	7.3

    II-D-20

    TABLE 12
    SHELTER DESIGNATIONS AND OPTIONS
    CATEGORY
    ZONE
    PUBLIC SHELTERS
    NAME
    ESTIMATED
    TRAVEL TIME
    1	Longboat Key

    1	Siesta Key

    1	Casey Key

    1	Myakka Floodplain
    First Christian Church
    Sarasota High School
    Sarasota Middle School
    Sarasota Family YMCA
    Concordia Lutheran Church
    VFW Post #3233

    Ashton Mennonite Church
    Gulf Gate Elementary

    VFW #8118
    Christ United Methodist
    Church
    Venice United Church of
    Church
    Venice Area Middle School
    Gulf Gate Elementary
    Ashton Mennonite Church

    North Port Elementary
    Venice Area Middle School
    Trinity United Presbyterian
    Church
    0.3
    0.3
    0.4
    0.4
    0.3
    0.3
    hr.
    hr.
    hr.
    hr.
    hr.
    hr.
    0.1 hr.
    0.2 hr.

    0.3 hr.
    0.3 hr.

    0.3 hr.
    0.4
    0.4
    0.4

    0.1
    0.3
    0.3
    hr.
    hr.
    hr.

    hr.
    hr.
    hr.
    I	Inland

    2	Myakka Floodplain

    2	Inland
    All Shelters
    <0.2 hr.
    North Port Elementary
    Trinity United Presbyterian
    Church
    Venice Area Middle School
    0.1 hr.
    0.3 hr.

    0.2 hr-.
    All Shelters
    (0.2 hr.
    North Port Elementary
    Trinity United Presbyterian
    Venice Area Middle School

    North Port Elementary
    0.1
    0.1
    0.4
    hr.
    hr.
    hr.
    3	Myakka Floodplain

    3	North Port
    0.4 hr.

    <0.2 hr.
    3      Inland
    All Shelters except
    First Christian Church
    As this table shows,  US 41 ends up being a restricting route for
    more than one zone. Times for zones feeding into US 41 will thus
    become  cumulative.   Such  a  restricting	point  is  called  an
    ultimate constricting point (see Table L4).	Such an 'accumulation
    of  times  creates a "greatest time to clear"  for eaich  category
    s;torm.   For Sarasota County,- however, but-of--county and shelter-'
    bound vehicles from the south county willbe assumed to have left

    II-D-21
    I
    I

    TABLE 13
    TIME TC CLEAR

    �----                     --JULY
    INTER-
    SLOW  MEDIATE	QUICK	SLOW

    7.4	6.0	5.5	8.7

    7.7	6.2	5.7	9.1

    1.4	1.1	1.1	1.6

    0.5	0.4	0.4	0.5

    -	1.4	-	-
    NOVEMBER___
    INTER-           TO COUNTY
    CATEGORY
    ZONE
    RESTRICTING
    POINT

    SR 789

    SR 758

    Blackburn Pt. Rd.

    Manasota Key Road

    US 41

    SR 775
    MEDIATE

    7.0

    7.3

    1.3

    0.4

    1.8

    2.2

    1;9.

    3. 7

    0.9

    6.0

    1.7

    3.7

    3.1
    QUICK

    6.5

    6.7

    1.2

    0.4
    LINE

    0.5

    0.9

    0.8

    1.1

    1.3
    1	Longboat Key

    1	Siesta Key

    1	Casey Key

    l.:Manasota Key

    1' Myakka Flood-
    plain
    H
    H
    I
    I
    to

    2.7

    2.1

    4.2
    1   -

    1
    1
    Englewood
    Bayfront

    Venice/Osprey

    Sarasota
    Bayfront

    Myakka Flood-
    plain

    Inland

    South Myakka
    plain

    North Port

    Inland
    2.1
    1.7
    1.5
    2.0
    1.0
    0.8

    0.4

    1.2
    US 4]

    US 41
    1.8

    3.3
    2'

    2

    3

    3
    3 -
    3 . .
    US 41.
    0.9
    US 41

    SR 777
    4.2

    1.4

    3.4

    2.6
    0.9

    1.4

    1.5

    1.0
    1.8
    1.3

    3.1
    1.6

    3.4
    Road i

    !
    Sumter

    1-75
    4.2

    -  ~      . -          -                        --                                                                      -

    US 41 before traffic enters the City of Sarasota.   However. even
    I
    with such an assumption,  US 41 remains the ultimate constricting
    route.
    !
    TABLE 14
    ULTIMATE CONSTRICTING ROUTE

    TIME
    CATEGORY  CONSTRICTING	JULY	NOVEMBER
    ROUTE	INTER-	INTER-
    I
    SLOW  MEDIATE	QIUICK	SLOW  MEDIATE	QUICK

    Tropical   SR 758        7.7    6.2	5.7	9.1    7.3	6.7
    I        Storm
    1	SR 758	7.7	6.2	5.7	9.1	7.3	6.7

    *1      2	US 41	-	8.1	-	-	10.0	-

    3	US 4	1 -	81	-	-	10.0	-

    The  large	times required on US-41 for a  Category	3  hurricane
    could perhaps be lessened by a third north-south road through the
    1    county.	Of course, the possibility exists that improved traffic
    control	during the evacuation would better distribute  loadings.
    If that is the case, the ultimate constricting points become the
    sum  of  the routes exiting the County.   Table 15 depicts  times
    that may occur, given different routing scenarios.

    The  last factor to be incorporated into calculating  the	County
    I      clearance	time  is	the	response of potential  evacuees	to  an
    evacuation	order.	The	original  1981-82  Regional  Hurricane
    Evacuation Plan discussed this topic on page 125, and concluded
    3    that	seven  hours  would be the minimum time needed to  clear  a
    zone,	because-some evacuees would dawdle more than others.  Mr.re..
    recent	history	indicates  that sudden or  dramatic	changes  in
    hurricanes  can	heighten the evacuees response	into	a  "quick"
    *    evacuation, limited basically by road capacity.	Consequently, in
    evaluating   the	final   criteria	that  determines   a   slow,
    intermediate,  or	quick evacuation,	both slow and  intermediate
    I    zones will have a minimum response time of seven  hours;	"quick"
    times, however, will be limited only by roadway capacity.	All of
    these	factors  combine to create a' countywide  clearance	time.
    'I   This	time will vary depending upon the routes available for  out
    " of  county evacuation,  the time of season,  and whether -'t is  a
    slow,  intermediate,  or quick response.  Table 16 summarizes the
    contribution  to  the greatest clearance time for the County  for
    each category storm.

    The  clearance  time  for the County as a whole  for	Category  3
    I      storms  will  increase  if out-of-county  evacuation	is  limited
    sQlely to 1-75 (north).   If more routes are provided,  the ,tilje   ;.  o'.j
    ffi.y lessen.  This, 6fcoure depends upon the icepact on the other'
    3    evacuating counties.
    II-D-23

    TABLE 15
    COUNTY EXITING ROUTES
    T rTIMES
    JULY   NOVEMBER

    CATEGORY
    TOTAL
    VEHIC  ES
    LEAVING CO.
    l.OF
    TOTAL COUNTY
    V EH TIC L E S
    ROIJTES
    COMBINED CAPACITIES
    Tropical
    St ().r.m

    1(a )

    I(b)
    0(J)
    146(N)

    17, 311 (J)
    25, 959(N)
    o (J)
    1 (N)
    50.4(J3)
    58. 6(N)
    1-75
    3, 647
    4.7
    7.1

    4.7
    US 41 & 1-75
    5,475
    3.2
    H
    H
    I

    k-.
    I
    6. 3
    8.7

    5.8
    2(a)
    23, 130(J)
    31,780(N)
    57.1(J)
    62. 2(N)
    same as 1(a)
    2(b)
    4.2
    same as 1(b)
    3(.i)

    3 (b)

    3 Cc')
    same as 1(a)
    9.7
    12.7

    8.5

    6.5
    35, 335(J)
    46,470(N)
    66. 6(J)
    72.1(N)
    same as 1(b)

    US 41, US 301,
    I--75
    6.4
    4.9
    7, 1.62
    and

    -	-	-            -	-                        -
    m	m m	m m        m m	m m        m m                                               m m

    TABLE 16
    TOTAL EVACUATION TIME
    _____ CLEARANCE TIME--__
    S L O I  INTElR-    QUIlCK
    ME ) DI A T1 E
    __-  SU1MM ARY___
    SLOW   TNTER--       QUlICK
    ME DIATE
    CAT EGORUY
    DESTINATION (1)
    WE ATHTER (2)
    i         7. 7(J)
    9.1I(N)
    6.2(J)	5.7(J)
    7.3(N)	6.7(N)
    1. 3
    17.0(J)	15.5(J)
    18.4(N)	16.6(N)
    8
    15. 0(J)
    16. 0 (N)
    2     B    .1I(J)
    Io. 0 (N4)
    B.1I(J)
    10. 0(N)
    S.1I(J)
    10. 0(N)
    1. 2
    8
    17. 3 (J)
    19. 2 (N)
    17.3(J)	17.3(J)
    19.2(N)	19.2(N)
    .3    B    .1I(J)
    I10. 0(N)
    . 8.1(J)	8.1(J)
    10.0(N)	10.0(N)
    1. 5
    8
    17.6(J)	17.6(J)
    ]9.5(N)	-19.5(N)
    17. 6 (J)
    19. 5 (N)
    H-
    H

    I'-

    u
    I
     (1)  From Table. 12 or 13, whichever is greater.
    .-(2) From Table.11

    !

    PART II '- 1991 FORECASTS                                                    I

    Units Population, and Vehicles

    Part   of	hurricane  preparedness  involves  understanding   and
    evaluating	the growth that is expected in the forthcoming years.
    This element discusses short ranged growth (4 years) the area may
    undergo,  and  the  facilities that are expected to be  added  to
    serve it.

    The  growth	predicted follows a single ,,traight-line  forecast
    technique.	Expected  increases  by category and  community  for
    housing,  persons,  and  vehicles for 1991 are depicted in Tables
    17, 18, and 19.

    Table 17 forecasts a total of 154,578 dwelling units for 1991.

    Table  18  forecasts  a total of 247,144  persons  in  July;  and
    280,003 in November.

    Table  19  forecasts a total of 123,578  vehicles  in  July;  and             I
    140,009 in November.
    I
    I
    I
    !
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    II-D-26
    I

    TABLE 17
    SARASOTA COUNTY - HIOUSING ESTIMATE FOR 1991
    (Based upon 143,545 projected hlousing Units)
    Ilotel-
    Motel
    Storm
    Cateilory
    Residential
    Sing] e-Family
    Mobile Recreational
    l[ome    Vehicle
    Zone
    Apar-tment
    Condo
    Duplex
    Total
    1	Longboat Key
    1	Siesta Key
    ]	Casey Key
    1I	Manasota Key
    .1	Myakka Floodplain
    II	Englewood Bayfront
    1        Venice/Osprey
    1      Sarasota Bavfront
    1,978
    1,873
    463
    316
    2,364
    978
    3,673
    3 .RQ
    348
    N/P
    N/P
    N/P
    2,815
    1,459
    275
    4n6
    N/P*
    N/P
    N/P
    N/P
    N/P
    1

    C/
    129
    970
    178
    55
    133
    97
    147
    Rl .r
    6,552
    7,533
    514
    1
    N/P
    112
    371
    4A   C
    76
    2
    N/P
    N/P
    N/P
    2
    5
    T /
    1,379
    110
    32
    N/P
    N/P
    35
    79
    9,
    1.0,462
    10,488
    1,187
    372
    5,312
    2,684
    4,556
    q Arr
    ..	ae}	X I Uuil	rIi)Jv �	lr   I	JZ)J)O
    TOTALS     FLOOD ZONE 1	15,534	5,303         7        2,324	19,641	85       1,717	44,611

    2     Myakka Floodplain	2,314	N/P	N/P	160	N/P	N/P	89	2,563
    2          Inland	986	9,372	131	951	4,149	497	424	16,510

    TOTALS	FLOOD ZONE 2	3,300	9,372	131	1,111	4,149	497	513	19,073

    3	South Myakka	523	240	N/P	16	1,455-	N/P	N/P	2,234
    3'	North Port	3,221	1,053	N/P	43            11	N/P	N/P	4,328
    3.:        Inland	4,751	2,655	518	794	6,145	635	634	16,132

    TOTALS     FLOOD ZONE 3	8,495	3,948	518	853	7,611	635	634	22,694
    H~~~~~~~~~----  -----
    I
    H
    H
    I
    4
    FLOOD ZONE 4
    7,876
    1,861
    2
    1,389
    3,227
    183
    1,375    15,913

    -5
    FLOOD ZONE 5
    38,722
    2,924    1,389
    1,974
    5,765    1,254
    259   52,287

    ====_=====                     =_==========_========_==============__==_ =__l======================----
    GRAND TOTALS    ALL ZONES                              73,927              23,408    2,047                        7,651              40,393
    2,654                   4,498   154,478
    -,;,
    * No Pr:~iection

    .... ~.

    . .

    !

    TABLE 18                                           I
    SARASOTA COUNTY POPULATION ESTIMATES FOR 1991

    RECREATIONAL               RECREATIONAL
    CATEGORY   ZONE	JULY     VEHICLE	NOVEMBER    VEHICLE

    1   Longboat Key	13,854	329	16,310	574
    Siesta Key	14,037	N/P*	16,426	N/P
    Casey Key	1,867	N/P	2,059	N/P
    Manasota Key             753	N/P           770	N/P
    Myakka Floodplain	7,861	2,663	9,918	4,645
    Englewood Bayfront	3,768	1,381	4,875	2,408
    Venice/Osprey	8,766	262	9,191	459
    Sarasota Bayfront	14,756	384	16,556	669

    Subtotal	65,662	76,105
    Mobile Homes 2-5	17,936	31,711
    --- -- --- -- --- -- --- -- --- -- --- -- --- -- --- -- --
    TOTAL	83,598                 107,816

    2   Myakka Floodplain	5,239          N/P	5,336         N/P
    Inland	18,674   8,918	26,783      15,581

    NEW EVACUEES	14,995	16,538
    TOTAL 1 - 2	98,593	124,354

    3   South Myakka	2,990	227	3,586         396
    North Port	7,877	996	8,700	1,737
    Inland	22,963   2,717	27,206	4,847

    NEW EVACUEES	29,890	32,512
    TOTAL 1 - 3	128,483	156,866

    4   Zone 4	26,177    1,762	29,094       3,072

    NEW EVACUEES	24,415	26,022
    TOTAL 1 - 4	152,898	182,888

    5   Zone 5	97,562    3,316	103,193       6,078

    NEW EVACUEES	94,246	97,115
    TOTALS 1 - 5	247,144	280,003

    * No Projection
    I

    RZ; s + i c: * ' * ;e>.t ,;.1 . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~! . .r ,
    .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  ,.  .

    II-D-28

    T*q E 19
    MOTOR VEHICLi! %,`-'IMATES FOR 1991

    Recreational           Recreational
    I    Zone      Name	July   Vehicle	November   Vehicle

    Longboat Key	6,928	N/P*	8,157	N/P
    m|    ~ SiesLa Key	7,018	N/P	8,212	N/P
    Casey Key              933	N/P	1,031	N/P
    Myakka Floodplain	3,930	N/P        385	N/P
    Englewood Bayfront	1,885	-1	2,437	1
    *I~ ~ Venice/Osprey	4,383	1 .	4,596	3
    Sarasota Bayfront	7,379	N/P	8,279	N/P

    |I     2    Myakka Floodplain	2,620	N/P	2,658	N/P
    Inland	9,337	26	13,393	59

    3    South Myakka	1,500	N/P	1,794	N/P
    North Port	3,938	N/P	4,351	N/P
    Inland	11,482	103	13,603	234

    3        4	Zone 4	13,088        1	14,548           1

    5	Zone 5	48,780      275	51,597        626

    Additional Facilities

    I    The   additional  facilities  expected	can  be  categorized	as
    "shelters"  and "routes."  Regretfully,	future shelter site	and
    capacity information has not yet been exactly determined.   Route
    3 :improvements, however, are better known.
    I
    The Sarasota County school board expects growth in school
    facilities to keep up with population growth. Two new elementary
     schools and a middle school are expected to be built by 1991.  In
    addition,	a  aumber  of existing schools are likely  to  undergo_
    expansion.	All planned expansion and new facilities are expected
    to be in Category 3 zones or further inland.  Thus, they will add
    to shelter facilities in any likely storm scenario.

     Table  20 shows expected shelter capacities for  1991.   However,
     new  shelter  growth (10X) does not match  forecasted	population
    growth  (21%).	Consequently,  conditions will worsen	regarding
    shelters  with	the  exception of tropical storm  (less	than  1)
    conditions,  where the increase in shelter space should rouse new
    *  barrier island residents.

    m
    II-D-29

    I
    I
    TABLE 20
    1991 PUBLIC SHELTER CAPACITY
    I
    EVACUATING
    POPULATION
    JULY    NOVEMBER
    % POPULATION
    SHELTERED
    JULY    NOVEMBER
    STORM
    CATEGORY
    SHELTER
    SPACE
    I
    Tropical Storm
     1.
    2
    3
    4
    5
    22,174	30,511	35,565	72.7	62.4
    22,174	83,598	107,816	26.5	20.6
    22,174	98,593	124,354	22.5	17.8
    22,174	128,483	156,866	17.3	14.1
    22,174	152,898	182,88.	14.5	12.1
    --------------------    N/A�
    I
    I
    TABLE 21
    POPULATION DISPLACEMENT RATIO
    I
    STORM
    CATEGORY
    DISPLACED
    JULY   NOVEMBER
    NOT DISPLACED
    JULY   NOVEMBER
    RATIO
    JULY   NOVEMBER
    I
    Tropical
    Storm	30,511	35,565	216,633
    1	83,598	107,816	163,546
    2	98,593	124,354	148,551
    3	128,483	156,866	118,661
    4	152,898	182,888	94,246
    5	----------------------- N/A
    244,438	0.1	0.1
    172,187	0.5	0.6
    155,649	0.7	0.8
    123,137	1.1	1.3
    97,115	1.6	1.9
    I
    I
    Route   improvements  for  the  next  five-year  period  indicate
    substantial improvements and expansions will be made to routes
    leading   to   1-75.    This  will  probably  speed   evacuation,
    particularly in the South Venice area. Using the Sarasota County

    Capital Improvements Program (1983) as a guide, the following
    significant improvements are forecast:

    (a)  Jacaranda - add 2 lanes to existing 2 lanes -  Major Arte-rial
    Venice to Center
    (b) Manasota Beach - Resurface and widen 4 feet - Collector
    Bridge to SR 775
    (c)  Lockwood Ridge - Construct 4 lanes - Major Arterial
    Myrtle to University Parkway
    (d)  Old Myakka - Resurface and widen 2 feet - Minor Arterial
    Fruitville Road to North County Line
    (e) University Parkway - Add 2 lanes to existing 2 lanes -
    Major Arterial    US 301 to 1-75

    Whereas the exact capacities of these new improvements cannot be
    calculated	at  this time,  an estimate can be  made.   Table	22
    provides  a	revision of the previously provided in Table  10	to
    represent 1991 conditions.

    II-D-30
    II-D-30
    I
    I
    I

    TABLE 22
    REVISED CAPACITIES
     NEW
    CAPACITY

    C
    I
    OLD
    APACITY

    -996 (quick)

     877 (quick)

    new route

    new route

    1,032 (quick)
    U'
    I
    I

    I
    U.
    I,
    U,
    ROUTE
    Jacaranda Boulevard, Venice         2,113
    Avenue -  Center Road
    Manasota Beach Road, SR 775 -       1,044 (quick)
    County Line
    Lockwood Ridge, Myrtle -            1,607
    University Parkway
    Old Myakka Road, Fruitville -         989 (quick)
    County line
    University Parkway, US 301 - 1-75  2,178
    Improvements on Lockwood Ridge Road will cause it to connect with
    Beneva,	via Twelfth Street, and thus form a potential evacuation
    route.	Not  shown are improvements on  1-75,  through  Sarasota
    County, which are likely to increase its capacity to some degree.

    Assuming that these improvements are in place, new shelter
    satisfaction capacities (Table 23), time to clear (Table 24),
    ultimate constricting route (Table 25), exiting route assessments
    (Table  26),  and clearance time ca].culations (Table 27)  can  be
    made.
    TABLE 23
    SHELTER SATISFACTION, 1991
    PERCENT MET
    JULY      NOVEMBER
    CATEGORY
    Tropical Storm
    1
    2
    - 3
    4
    5
    92.5	90.8
    46.8	39.3
    40.6	34.9
    31.8	26.4
    23.1	19.4
    --- N/A ----

    -   m
    Because	all of its shelters are located in Category 3 zones	for
     further	inland,  it is the only county in the Region to show	an
    increase	in  shelter  satisfaction.    This  is  helped  by	the
    availability of hotel/motel rooms in the higher storm categories,
    and the narrowness of the flood areas in most of the county.

    '
     It can be seen that the new routes, described in Table 22, do not
    affect  clearance times directly.  However,  it should be	noted
    v, that  these routes do affect times to the County line.   In	this
    regard,  the greatest affect is achieved by University Boulevard,
    and the Lockwood Ridge-Beneva Corridor.

    I	...	..
    ,j,,   ,.   >	......................,	j	,  ...............................  ' ,  ' ^  ' '' . gt  t. S>, ................................................................................... > A
    II-D-31

    TABLE 24
    TIME TO CLEAR 1.991'-
    ____JULY	NOVEMBER
    INTER-	INTER-
    SLOW  MEDIATE  QUICK  SLOW	MEDIATE  QUIICK
    CATEGORY     ZONE

    1   Longboat Key
    RESTRICTING
    POINT

    SR 789
    7.3
    6.7    10.6   8.5
    7.9
    9.0
    :1
    '

    1
    Siesta Key
    SR 758
    9.4
    7.5      6.9    11.]
    8.9
    8.2
    Casey Key
    1.2    1.9    1.6
    1.5

    2.4
    Blackburn Pt. Rd.
    1.7
    1.3
    1.7	-	-	2.2

    2.1	1.8	3.3	-2.7
    Myakka Flood- US 41
    plain

    H
    H
    Il
    t1
    2.6
    1   Engelwood
    Bayfront

    1  Venice/Osprey

    I Sarasota/
     :.	Bayfront

    2	Myakka Flood-
    SR 775
    2.2

    4.1

    1.1

    -       5.1
    .- .a
    -   4.5
    US 41

    US 41
    1.1

    7.3
    US 41

    US 41
    pla

    .2-	Inland

    .,3	South

    :3	North
    in
    1.7 :   1.6	2.6	2.1

    4.1   : 3.8	5.1	4.5
    '1.9
    2.2
    Myakka

    Port
    SR 777
    Sumter Road
    4.1
    5. 1
    .a: Inland          1-75                  -       3.2             - -    3.8       -
    *.                             |X' [

    ;,.,:  ..
    %	I	I

    :      -     -	. - ,   -	-   -	-	-	-     -     -     -	-� .         '	.  ;
    I1 l: .'.	_	.l                                - ..	ll l	l I i.l	l	l l
    l l          1l

    L: "	\~-~ - -                                         -    ~	~	. 't

    TABLE 25
    m                  ~~~~ULTIMATE CONSTRICTING ROUTE FOR
    1991

    JULY                    NOVEMBER
    m|~ ~ CONSTRICTING	INTER-	INTER-
    CATEGORY    ROUTE    SLOW	MEDIATE  QUICK   SLOW	MEDIATE  QUIICK

    Tropical
    ~*    Storm	SR 758	9.4	7.5	6.9	11.1	8.9	8.2

    |  I 1	SR 758	9.4	7.5	6.9	11.0	8.9	8.2

    2	US 41	-	9.8	-	-	12.1	-

    3	US 41	-	9.8	-	-	12.1	-

    Table  25	shows  that the county's ultimate	constricting	route
    times for	(1991) has increased over current estimated times.   A
    *      third  north-south  road  through  the  county  would	certainly
    decrease these times.   Such a road,  Honore' Avenue,	is planned
     for the 1990's, but is not expected to be in place by 199].

    Tables 26 and 27 indicate that both the County exiting route
    times and the total evacuation times for 1991 can be expected to
    increase.   This  can be prevented through more shelters  in  the
    I.
    County.	The critical conditions,  however,  exist primarily for
    Category	2  and  3 storms,  and not so severely for  Category  1
     storms.
    II-D-33

    TABLE 26
    COUNTY EXITING ROUTES
    T' OTA L
    VE IC L ES
    LEAVING CO.
    % OF
    TOTAL COUNTY
    VEHICLES
    !
    COMBINED
    CAPACITIES
    TIMES
    NOVEMBER
    CATEGORY
    ROUTES
    JULY
    Tropical
    Storm

    l(a)
    1,044 (J)
    1,636(N)

    22,237(J)
    32,722(N)
    7.5
    9.2

    53.4
    60.7
    1-75

    1-75

    US 41 & 1-75
    3,647

    3,647

    5,475
    0.3

    6.1

    4.1
    0.4

    9.0

    6.0
    l 1(b)

    2(a)
    29,282(J)
    40,477(N)
    59.4
    65.1
    1-75
    3,647
    8.0
    11.1
    2(b)
    5. 3

    12.U

    8.0
    US 41 & 1-75

    I-75

    IJS 41 & 1-75
    5,475

    3,647

    5,475
    7.4

    15.8

    10.5
    3(a)      43,812(J)
    57,727(N)
    68.2
    73.6
    3(b)
    3(c)
    US 41, US 301
    and I-75
    7,162
    6.1
    8.1
    -: l          /                      -         I                                           I-  -  -

    - - - - m - m -    m   m - -   - - - m
    TABLE 27
    TOTAL EVACUATION TIME
    FOR 1991
    .-SUMMARY__
    SLOW   INTER-   QUICK
    MEDIATE
    CLEARANCE TIME-__
    SLOW   INTEPi-      QUICK
    MRD I ATE
    DESTINATION(.)
    WEATHER (2)
    CAT EGORY
    Trop iical
    S t Drni
    18.4(J) 16.5(J)
    20.1(N) 17.9(N)
    15. 9(J)
    17. 2(N)
    8
    9.4(J)	7.5(J)
    11.1(N)	8.9(N)
    6.9(J)
    8.2(N)

    6.9(J)
    8.2(N)
    1.0
    18.4(J) 16.5(J)	15.9(J)
    20.1(N) 17.9(N)	14.2(N)
    9.4(J)
    11.1(N)
    7. 5 (.)
    8.9(N)
    1.0
    8
    18. 8(J)
    21.1(N)

    18. 8()
    21.1(N)
    1.0
    8
    18.8(J) 18.8(J)
    21.1(N) 21.1(N)

    18.8(J) 18.8(J)

    .21.1.(N) 21.1(N)
    9.8(J) 9.8(J)

    12.1(N) 12.1(N)

    9.8(p) 9.8(J)
    1.2.1(N) 12.1(N)
    9.8(J)
    12.1(N)

    9.8(J)
    12.1(N)
    2
    H
    H
    I

    w
    Ln
    1.0
    8
    3

    <1

    (2)
    From Table

    From Table
    25.

    12.

    SARASOTA COUNTY
    APPENDIX I - PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARDS TIMES

    The  pre-eye  landfall hazard times projected by the SLOSH  model
    appear  in	the  following table.   The  table	consists  of  the
    estimated	times for each selected grid point,	by storm category
    (1-5)  and	type  of  storm  track  (landfalling,   parallel  and
    crossing). In all cases, the worst probably times are used. The
    table is divided into 50 parts, for category 1 through 5
    I
    ;respectively. The first column names the grid point  being
    examined, followed by the projected time, in hours before
    estimated  eye  landfall,  that tidal flooding would  reach  that
    point.  This time estimate is followed.by a code "identifying the
    particular  storm track producing this: worst  probably  (longest)
    time.	These  coded storm tracks are fully described in Table 1,
    giving	the  track's landfall point and the. area  receiving  the
    maximum surge and/or winds.   The next column, "Total Duration in
    Hfours" lists the length of time the grid point is projected to
    experience one foot or more of flooding in a 24-hour period.

    U  i    Following  these  figures,  the next column lists  the  projected
    time, in hours before estimated eye landfall, that sustained gale
    force winds would reach the grid point.   Again, this is followed
    by  the coded storm track producing the worst probable  (longest)
    times, and the duration each point is expected to experience the
    wind	force during a 24-hour period.   Note that "sustained	gale
    force	winds" regers to winds sustained at over 40 mph.   In	all
    cases, eye landfall is the reference point used to determine pre-
    eye landfall hazard times.
    !
    !
    I
    !
    !
    !
    1

    I
    I
    APPENDIX ].
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL IIAZARD TIMES
    - CATEGORY 1
    LANDFALLING

    TOTAL'
    DURATION
    IN
    HOUR
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS
    I{OURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(l)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    STORM
    TRACK
    Englewood
    Buchanan Airport
    Manasota
    Venice Grove
    Venice Airport
    Venice
    Venice Beach
    Longboat Key
    Sarasota
    Bay Island

    LANDnFALLING
    5..
    5
    5.5
    5.5
    5.5
    5.5
    5
    5.5
    5.5
    5.5
    5.5
    (60
    (70
    (60
    (75
    (75
    (60
    (75
    (95
    (95
    (95
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    8.5
    8.5
    9
    8.5
    8.5
    9
    8.5
    8.5
    8.5
    8.5
    I
    6
    (75 NS)
    10
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 2

    TOTALI
    DURATION
    STORM	IN   *
    TRACK	HOURS A
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(l)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    Englewood
    Buchanan Airport
    Manasota
    Venice Grove
    Venice Airport
    Venice
    Venice Beach
    Longboat Key
    Sarasota
    Bay Island
    6.5
    6.5
    6.5
    6.5
    6.5
    6.5
    6.5
    6.0
    6.0
    6.5
    (65
    (70
    (65
    (75
    (75
    (75
    (75
    (95
    (90
    (95
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    ?M)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I

    10.
    10

    10
    10
    10.l

    10.5
    I
    I
    (75 NS)
    1.5
    2.5
    (75
    (75
    (95
    (95
    (95
    0
    6.5
    0.5
    1.0
    1.0
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    2
    14
    3
    3
    2.5
    (1)
    Greatest  time  before  landfall - not necessarily for worst  case  storm;  some
    tracks cause early flooding even though they may not produce highest surge - if
    more than 1 track produces same time, the one with the worse surge then chosen.
    (2)  Greatest time before landfall - same is true for winds as above for flooding.
    !

    "~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "'            .' r.;." :'  ....

    ~~~2~~~~~~~~~~~    .                    g~i:..;
    I
    I

    LANDFALL,ING
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HIAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 3
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    TOTAL
    DURATION
    IN
    HOURS
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(1)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    STORM
    TRACK
    Englewood
    Buchanan Airport
    Manasota
    Venice Grove
     Venice Airport
    I Venice
    -Venice Beach
    Longboat Key
    Sarasota
    Bay Island
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8
    8.5
    8.5
    (60 NS)
    (60 NS)
    (70 NS)
    (70 NS)
    (75 NS)
    (75 NS)
    (75 NS)
    (95 NS)
    (95 NS)
    (95 NS)
    13.5
    13.5
    13
    13
    13
    13.5
    13.5
    13.5
    14
    14
    55 .'
    3

    1.5
    7
    2
    2
    2
    (75 NS)
    (75
    (75
    (95
    (95
    (95
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    4
    16
    4
    5
    4.5
    LANDFALLING
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 4
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    TOTAL
    DURATION
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HOURS
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(l)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    Englewood
    I Buchanan
    Airport
    Manasota
    Venice Grove
    Venice Airport
    Venice
    Venice Beach
    Longboat Key
    I Sarasota
     Bay Island
    1.5
    1.5
    3.5
    .5
    -1
    2
    - 7.5
    2.5
    3
    3
    (70
    (70
    (75
    (70
    (75
    (75
    (75
    (95
    (95
    (95
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    4
    7
    6
    9.5
    .5
    5
    14.5
    7.5
    8.5
    8
    9.5
    9.5
    9.5
    9.5
    9.5
    9
    9
    9.5
    9.5
    9.5
    (60 NS)
    (75 NS)
    (70 NS)
    (75 NS)
    (75 NS)
    (60 NS)
    (60- Ng4
    (95 NS)
    (95 NS)
    (95 NS)
    15
    15
    15
    15
    15
    15
    15
    15.5
    15.5
    15.5
    (1) Greatest time before landfall - not necessarily for worst
    tracks cause early flooding even though they, may not produce
    more than I track produces same time, the one with the worse
    case storm; some
    highest surge - if
    surge then chosen.
    (2)  Greatest time before landfall - same is true for winds as above for flooding.
    3

    LANDFALLING
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 5

    TOTAl
    DURATIOy'
    STORM	IN N
    TRACK	HOU
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(1)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    Englewood
    Buchanan Airport
    Manasota
    Venice Grove
    .Venice Airport.
    Venice
    Venice Beach
    Longboat Key
    Sarasota
    Bay Island
    1.5
    1
    3
    .5
    -1
    1.5
    7
    3
    3.5
    3
    (65
    (60
    (75
    (65
    (75
    (75
    (75
    (95
    (95
    (95
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    2.5
    5.5
    5    t..
    2.5
    .5
    3.5
    9.5
    5.0
    6.0
    5.5
    9
    � 9'
    9
    9
    8.5
    8.5
    8.5
    10.5
    10.5
    10.5
    (65
    (75
    (65
    (75
    (60
    (65
    (70
    (95
    (95
    (95
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    13.5
    13.5
    14
    13.5
    14 [
    13.5
    14
    5.5 I
    5.5
    5.5
    PARALLEL
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 1

    TOTAJ
    DURATIOP'
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HO
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(1)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    Englewood
    Buchanan Airport
    Manasota
    Venice Grove
    Venice Airport
    Venice
    Venice Beach
    1.5
    1
    1
    1
    1
    1
    .5
    ( 0 S)
    (15 WS)
    (15 WS)
    ( 0 S)
    ( 0 S)
    (15 ES)
    ( o-
    8.5
    8.51

    8.5

    8.5
    8.5
    --4
    (15 ES)
    3.5
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    (1) Greatest time before landfall - not necessarily for worst case storm; some
    tracks cause early flooding even though they may not produce highest surge  - if
    more than 1 track produces same time, the one with the worse surge then chosen.

    (2)  Greatest time before landfall - same is true for winds as above for flooding.

    4
    3
    I
    I

    PARALLEL
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL IHAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 2
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    TOTAL
    DURATION
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HOURS
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FIOODING(1)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    2.5
    2.5
    2
    2
    1.5
    1.5
    1.5
    ( 0 S)
    (15 Es)
    ( 0 S)
    (15 WS)
    ( 0 S)
    (15 WS)
    (15 WS)
    10.5
    10.5
    10.5
    10.5
    10.5
    10.5
    10.5
    EngleIwood
    Buchanan Airport
    Manasota
    Venice Grove
    Venice Airport
    I Venice
    Venice Beach
    --
    4.5
    (60 WS)       7.5
    PARALLEL
    PRF-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 3
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    TOTAL
    DURATION
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HOURS
    GRID
    I STORM
    POINTS
    HOTRS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(l)
    TOTAL
    STOTRZ	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    4.5
    4
    4
    4
    3.5
    2
    2
    ( 0 S)
    ( 0 S)
    (15 WS)
    (15 WS)
    (15 WS)
    (15 WS)
    (15 Ws)
    13.5
    13.5
    14
    14
    13.5
    13.5
    13.5
    Englewood
    Buchalan Airport
    Manasota
    Venice Grove
    Venice Airport
    Venice
    Venice Beach
    -5
    ( 0 S)
    1.5
    ( 0 S)
    4
    -4.5
    (1) Greatest time before landfall - not necessarily for worst
    tracks cause early flooding even though they may not produce
    more than I track produces same time, the one with the worse
    case sto-rm- some
    highest surge - if
    surge then chosen.
    (2)  Greatest time before landfall - same is true for winds as above for flooding.

    j              . .. -': .,.'':'  .                                                .......'
    5

    PARALLEL
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CAI'EGORY 4

    TOTAI
    DURATI(

    HOURS,
    HOIURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(1)
    TOTAL
    DURATION
    IN IHOURS
    STORM
    TRACK
    STORM
    TRACK
    Englewood
    Buchanan Airport
    Manasota                 -5.5
    Venice Grove
    Venice Airport
    Venice	-8.5
    Venice Beach	-4

    PARALLEL - 60 WS ONLY
    5
    4.5
    4.5
    4-5
    5
    5
    5
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (30
    wS)
    WS)
    WS)
    WS)
    ws)
    WS)
    wS)
    16.5
    161
    16.5
    16.5
    171
    17
    17
    !

    (30 ws)       .5.
    (30 WS)
    (60 WS)
    1
    8
    I
    TOTAL
    DURATm
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HOURS
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 5
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(1)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    121
    12.5
    12.5

    12
    13
    13 1

    case  st-ro- some
    highest surge - if I
    surge then chosen. I
    Englewood
    Buchanan Airport
    Manasota
    Venice Grove
    Venice Airport
    Venice
    Venice Beach
    3
    2.5
    2.5
    2
    2
    2
    2
    -4
    8
    (1)  Greatest  time  before  landfall - not necessarily for worst
    tracks cause early flooding even though they may not produce
    more than 1 track produces same time, the one with the worse
    (2)  Greatest time before ].andfall - same is true for winds as above for flooding.

    I

    I

    *. �  *..  ,   ' . ? : .  ~  ,. >:: �  " .  y

    6 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ a
    6m
    1

    CROSS ING
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 1
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    TOTAI
    DURATION
    IN
    HOURS
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(1)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOUILS
    STORM
    TRACK
    I
    Englewood
    Buchanan Airport
    Manasota
    Venice Grove
    Venice Airport
    Venice
    I  Venice Beach
    4.5
    4.5
    4.5
    4.5
    4
    4
    4
    (45
    (45
    (45
    (45
    (45
    (45
    (45
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    10
    9.5
    9.5
    9.5
    9.5
    9.5
    9.5
    (45 NS)
    -2
    2.5
    CROSSING
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 2
    TOTAL
    DURATION
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HOURS
    HOIRS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    SUSTAINED GALE
    FORCE WINDS(2)
    GRID
    STORM
    POINTS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(l)
    TOTAL
    STORM	DURATION
    TRACK	IN HOURS
    I Englewood
    Buchanan Airport
    Manasota
    Venice Grove
    Venice Airport
    Venice
    I  Venice Beach

    CROSSING
    5.5
    5
    5
    5.5
    5
    5
    4.5
    (30
    (30
    (30
    (45
    (45
    (45
    (45
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    11.5
    11.5
    11.5
    11.5
    11
    11
    11.5
    (45 NS)
    -1..5
    8.5
    PRE-EYE LANDFALL HAZARD TIMES - CATEGORY 3
    -  -.   TOTAL
    DURATION
    STORM	IN
    TRACK	HOURS
    : HOlRS BEFORE
    TOTAL	EYE LANDFALL-
    STORM	DURATION	SUSTAINED GALE
    TRACK	IN HOURS	FORCE WINDS(2)
    GRID
    STORM
    I       POINTS
    HOURS BEFORE
    EYE LANDFALL-
    FLOODING(1)
    I Englewood
    I
    Buchanan A
    Manasota
    Venice Gro
    Venice Air
    Venice
    Venice Bea

    : (1)
    Ii
    (2)
    -~~~~

    kirport

    )ve
    7port

    Lch
    13
    12
    13.5
    1_2.5
    '
    12.5
    13
    12.5
    5
    5
    5
    5
    5
    5
    4.5
    (30
    (45
    (30
    (45
    (45
    (45
    (45
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    NS)
    (45 NS)
    1 .
    -2.5
    -1
    (45 NS)
    . 9
    Greatest time before landfall - not necessarily for worst case storm; some
    tracks cause early flooding even though they may not produce highest surge  - if
    more than 1 track produces same time, the one with the worse surge then chosen.

    Greatest t imne before landfall - same is- true. for winds as above for floqding.

    7

    TABLE 2
    HURRICANES SIMULATED BY NUMERICAL
    STORM SURGE PREDICTION MODEL
    L	C
    O	A
    C	T
    M	A	E
    O	T	T	G
    D	Y	I	0

    I

    : LANDFALL/EXITING POINT
    I
    OR
    AREA RECEIVING
    E	P	O	R   :  CLOSEST APPROACH
    MAXIMUM SURGE/WINDS
    1,	E	N	Y
    -  - -  - - -  - -_	-	- -	- -	- -  - -	- -	- -  - -  - -  - -  - -  - - -  - -  - -  - -  - -  - -  - -  - -  - -  - -  - -  - -  - -  - -  - -  - -  - -  - -  - -   -
    Venice Beach
    Venice Beach
    Venice Beach
    Venice Beach
    Venice Beach
    SL
    SL
    SL
    SL
    SL

    S L
    SL
    SL
    SL
    SL

    SL
    SL
    SL
    ST
    SL
    L 75NS
    L 75NS
    L 75NS
    L 75NS
    L 75NS

    L 80NS
    L 80NS
    L 80NS
    L 80NS
    L 80NS

    L 85NS
    L 85NS
    L 85NS
    L 85NS
    L 85NS
    1	:Longboat
    2	:Longboat
    3	:Longboat
    4	:Longboat
    5	:Longboat

    1	:Longboat
    2	:Longboat
    3	:Longboat
    4	:Longboat
    5	:Longboat
    Key
    Key
    Key
    Key
    Key

    Key
    Key
    Key
    Key
    Key
    I
    Bay
    Bay
    Bay
    Bay
    Bay
    Island
    Island
    Island
    Island
    Island
    I
    I
    1	:Anna Maria
    2	:Anna Maria
    3	:Anna Maria
    4	:Anna Maria
    5	:Anna Maria
    Key
    Key
    Key
    Key
    Key
    Bay
    Bay
    Bay
    Bay
    Bay
    Island
    Island
    Island
    Island
    Island
    I
    I
    SL	L	90NS
    SL	L	90NS
    SL	L	90NS
    SL	L	90NS
    SL	L	9ONS
    1	:Tampa Bay
    2	:Tampa Bay
    3	:Tampa Bay
    4	:Tampa Bay
    5	:Tampa Bay

    I	:Egmont Key
    2	:Egmont Key
    3	:Egmont Key
    4	:Egmont Key
    5	:Egmont Key

    1	:Egmont Key
    2	:Egmont Key
    3	:Egmont Key
    4	:Egmont Key
    5	:Egmont Key
    Island
    Island
    Island
    Island
    Island
    Bay
    Bay
    Bay
    Bay
    Bay
    I
    I
    SL	L	95NS
    SL	L	95NS
    SL	L	95NS
    SL	L	95NS
    SL	L	95NS

    SL	L	KE
    SL	L	RE
    SL	L	KE
    SL	L	KE
    SL	1.	KE
    Sarasota
    Sarasota
    Sarasota
    Sarasota
    Sarasota

    Longboat Key
    Longboat Key
    Longboat Key
    Longboat Key
    Longboat Key
    I
    I
    I
    KEY:
    SL -
    L -
    P -
    NS -
    WS -
    SLOSH (Sea, Lake, and Overland
    Landfalling Hurricane
    Paralleling Hurricane
    North of Sanibel Island
    West of Sanibel Island
    Surges from
    I
    I
    I
    8
    I

    TABLE 2  (Continuedl
    HURRICANES SIMULATED BY NUMERICAL
    STORM SURGE PREDICTION MODEL
    L	C
    0	A
    C	T
    I
    I
    M	A	E
    O	T	T	G	: LANDFALL/EXITING POINT
    D	Y	I	O	:          OR                    AREA RECEIVING
    E	P	O	R        CLOSEST APPROACH         MAXIMUM SURGE/WINDS
    L	E	N	Y

    SL	P	60WS	1	:60 mi. west of.-Sanibel	Venice Beach
    SL	P	60WS	2	:60 mi. west of Sanibel	Venice Beach
    SL	P	60WS	3	:60 mi. west of Sanibel	Venice Beach
    SL.	P 60WS	4	:60 mi. west of Sanibel	Venice Beach.
    SL	P  60WS	5	:60 mi. west of Sanibel	Venice Beach
    SL - SLOSTI (Sea, Lake, -ard ,Overland Surges from
    Hurricanes (Model)
    L - Landfalling Hurricane
    P - Paralleling Hurricane
    KE - Egmont Key

    "'. ':.:.~" i.' ~' '',"'   ",.".�' ' ;:� '  .'"' .  '.'...~'~:~.: "u' ''    '.,,"~'):
    9

    HENDRY COUNTY - TABLE OF CONTENTS

    Section                                           Page #

    Hurricane Vulnerability .............................II-E-l
    Recent Storm History.................................II-E-4
    Affected Population ..................................II-E-4
    Motor Vehicles ....................................... II-E-5
    Shelters .............................................II-E-6
    Routes .............................................. II-E-9
    Clearance Times .....................................II-E-13
    1991 Forecasts ...........................  II-E-16
    m,
    APPENDIX - Hazard Times ..............................

    LIST OF MAPS
    Map                                                 Page #

    1. Hurricane Wind Impact Zones .......................II-E-2
    2.	Flood and Wind Vulnerability Zones ................II-E-3
    3.	Red Cross Managed Public Shelter Locations ........II-E-7
    4. Evacuation Routes .................................II-E-10
    5.  Routes Subject to Rainfall Flooding ...............II-E-12

    LIST OF TABLES
    Table                                                Page #

    1. Housing Units .....................................II-E-4
    2. Population Estimates ..............................II-E-5
    3. Vehicle Estimates .................................II-E-6
    4. Shelters ..........................................II-E-8
    5. Population Displacement Ratio ..................... II-E-8
    6. Shelter Satisfaction ..............................II-E-9
    7.	Evacuation Route Capacity Calculation .............II-E-11
    8.	Pre-Landfa]l Flood/Wind Conditions ................ II-E-13
    9. Shelter Designations Options ...................... II-E-13
    10. Time to Clear ..................................... II-E-14
    11. Ultimate Constricting Route ....................... II-E-14
    12. County Exiting Routes ............................. II-E-15
    13. Total Evacuation Time ............................. II-E-15
    14. Housing J Units, 1991 ................................II-E-16
    15. Population Estimates, 1991 ...................... II-E-16
    ]6. Traffic Estimates, 1991 ........................... II-E-17
    17. Shelter Satisfactions, 991 ...............1.         II-E-18
    18. Total Time, 1991 ................ I1-E-18
    1<-: .  ,5:;'                       ,      ,r .        ..         ;    >, _;,

    HENDRY COUNTY
    NATURAL DISASTER PLAN (Hurricanes)

    HURRICANE VULNERABILITY

    The hurricane vulnerability of Hendry County has been analyzed
    ;  using  a  numerical storm surge prediction model known as  SLOSH,
    short for Sea,  Lake,  and Overland Surges from  Hurricanes.    In
    fact, the SLOSH model was first applied to Lake Okeechobee. This
    mode] is described in detail in the Regional Hurricane Evacuation
    Plan    1981-82,  prepared  by  the  Southwest  Florida  Regional
    Planning. Council, as well as A Storm Surge Atlas for Southwest
    Florida,   prepared  by  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric
    Administration,  Undated,  @ 1983).   These reports analyzed some
    187 separate storms for their potential impact on Southwest
    Florida. Both reports provide an assessment of methodologies and
    provide assumptions that can act towards increasing or decreasing
    forecasted flood and wind conditions.   However,  in summary, the
    following assumptions can be made.

    (1)	Landfalling storms provide the worst flooding potential
    (2)	Flooding will be worse south of the eye of the hurricane

    (3)	Wind	conditions making roads unsafe for travel will	arrive
    well	before  the eye of the hurricane,  and usually	before
    flood waters inundate evacuation routes

    (4)  Storm  landfall  prediction is not an  exact  science.   Any
    approaching storm has the capacity to strengthen or veer,
    decreasing or increasing the flooding and surge potential of
    the storm.

    Hlowever, in the case of Rendry County, the model does not predict
    any  flooding over the dike from Lake Okeechobee unless the	lake
    level  is over 18 feet (the preferred control level is  IS	feet)
    and only then in a very severe hurricane.	The assumption here is
    that if the lake is approaching 18 feet,	the locks can be opened
    to reduce it to the desired control level of 16 feet.

    The hurricane problem facing Hlendry County is high winds (See Map
    1).   This  is  a  problem because mobile homes are  required  to
    evacuate in all categories of hurricanes.   There are more mobile
    home/travel  trailer units in the County than any other  type  of
    dwelling unit: and they contain about 30% of the population.

    The County has been divided into vulnerability zones based on
    i     population,  shelter  locations  and the transportation  network.
    See Map 2 for the zones.
    !;
    '. . �  .   .],    .    .    ."  .,   .   '  .  .~.' !,~ � *   *:..�
    I1I-E- 1

    I
    I
    I
    I

    I,
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I

    N
    \\
    %%
    \\
    \\
    \
    /
    I -
    I
    I
    I
    I

    I
    I
    I
    I
    I

    I
    *       1

    3
    1
    1
    i
    II

    k

    x
    \

    I

    I

    /
    I
    I
    II

    fI
    I
    II
    II

    I
    I
    I
    //
    /!
    //
    Legend        . .	. �6t"l'(     !

    640	PH SSTANE 4 MILE COUNTY RADIUS - CATEGORY I
    40 MPH SUSTAINED
    WIND LINE           76                     - CATEGORY 2
    .... 2 HOUR WARNING
    LINE                98                     - CATEGORY 3

    SWFRPC
     81 - RNC
    MAAP 1
    HENDRY GC.OUNTY :- .
    HURRICANE WIND IMPACT ZONE
    II-E-2

    -  -  -  -  -  -   m -                             -  -            - m    -   m -  -
    I I
    ltKEECHOBEE

    CLEWISTON/BIG CYPRESS.
    =--     SR 80

    H

    SR 29

    H
    H      .
    I
    m

    0  2 3 4 MILES
    ISWFRPC-RNC
    LA BELLE/FELDA
    .--LI_�_3_Y
    MAP 2
    HENDRY COUNTY
    FLOOD AND WIND VULNERABILITY ZONES

    Recent Storm History

    Hurricane Donna was the last hurricane to affect Southwest
    Florida  to any significant degree.   At the time  the  hurricane
    hit, the County's population was 8,100, concentrated primarily in
    LaBelle and Clewiston.

    Hurricane	Floyd provided the area a scare on October  16,  1987.
    However,	it  veered  due  east before the  County  received  any
    impacts beyond high wind gusts.

    Affected Population

    The	first element in preparing an estimate of County  population
    is	to estimate dwelling units,  and dwelling unit types.   Using
    Planning  Department information of the County,	supplemented	by
    information	on	RV  Parks  by  the  Division	of   Hotels	and
    Restaurants,	it	is estimated that there are 9,747 dwellings	in
    the  county (See Table 1).   This estimate includes  conventional
    housing, mobile homes, and transitional housing such as inhabited
    travel trailers, and hotel and motel units.

    TABLE 1
    HENDRY COUNTY - HOUSING UNITS

    Recrea-
    Residential	Mobile	tional	Multi-Family	Hotel-
    Zone     Single-Family	Home	Vehicle	Apt.   Condo	Motel  Total

    LaBelle/       2,441	1,002     884	44       0	129   4,500
    Felda

    Clewiston/    2,631        1,574      406    362      80   194   5,247
    Big Cypress

    TOTALS     5,072       2,576   1,290    406        80   323	9,747

    Ulsing	the housing unit estimate,  a population estimate is	then             |
    made.	Two additional assumptions, however, are needed:  persons
    per household,  and vacancy rate.   The persons per household was
    estimated to be a standard 3.0 persons per household,  regardless
    of  unit.   Whereas  this assumption has   inaccuracies,	the	end
    result  probably  does  not  differ  significantly  from	a	more
    detail]ed analysis.  More detailed analysis, however, is needed to
    determine vacancy rates for unit type, since different unit types
    have  different vulnerability to flood or wind hazards.   Using a
    survey  estimate	used  in Regional  Hurricane  Evacuation  Plan,
    Appendix  C,  two	estimates of seasonal vacancy  were  prepared.
    These are as follows:
    I

    IT- E--4                                         3

    Unit Type               Seasonal Occupancy Rates
    July         November

    Single-Family Unit	0.95	0.96
    It    ~ Apartment	0.93	0.98
    Condominium (Conventional)	0.51	0.64
    Mobile fome	0.43	0.75
    I|    ~ Recreational Vehicle	0.18	0.41
    Motel/Hotel	0.54	0.63

    Hendry	County  evacuating  population is estimated	in  1987	to
    average	4,987 persons in July and 8,699 'persons at the start	of
    November.  This is summarized by community in Table 2.

    TABLE 2
    HENDRY COUNTY
    EVACUATING POPULATION ESTIMATES FOR EVACUATION ZONES
    m|~~~ ~~ALL STORM CATEGORIES

    ZONE                         ESTIMATE
    (Mobile Homes/ JULY                       NOVEMBER
    I
    Recreational Vehicles)

    LaBelle/Felda	2,433	4,244
    U|    ~ Clewiston/Big Cypress	2,554	4,455
    _________________________
    TOTALI             4,987             8,699

    Motor Vehicles

    Nearly all of the population affected by an oncoming hurricane
    will evacuate by private vehicle.   The question arises over  how
    many vehicles will b)e used in the evacuation. Issues relevant to
    this include the number -of vehicles owned, whether owners would
    d    be willing to leave any vehicles behind (since next to the  home,
    vehicles are the most expensive possession), whether a]ll drivers
    feel  confident  to operate a vehicle in  storm  conditions,  and
    whether	evacuatingf	families wish to be separated  in	different
    motor	vehicles.	Based  on  surveys,   respondents	indicated
    approximately 75% of vehicles available would be used in an
    evacuation.    (HIurricane Evacuation Plan, 1981-82, SWFRPC).  This
    averaged out to 1.1 vehicles per occupied unit.

    Using this ratio of cars and the occupancy ratio used previously,
    |I   the	county potential total of vehicles used in an evacuation  in
    July	would be 1,829,  and in November would be 3,189.  Since the
    vast	majority  of  liendry	County  evacuees  are	mobile   home
    residents,  these  figures	are applicable in all	categories  of
     hurricanes.   Table  3 summarizes the vehicle generation by  each
    community.
    TI-E-5

    !
    !
    TABLE 3
    HENDRY COUNTY VEHICLE ESTIMATES OF
    EVACUATION FROM MOBILE HOMESZ/TRAVEL TRAILERS

    July	November
    Storm	# vehicles	# vehicles
    Category        Zone	evacuating	evacuating

    All   LaBelle/Felda	8'92	1,556
    Clewiston/Big Cypress	937	1,634                   I

    TOTAL              1,829	3,189

    Shelters
    I
    Evacuees must have a place to go.   The SWFRPC undertook  surveys
    in 1979 and 1981 to determine evacuee preferences.   This data is
    summarized as follows: public shelters (24%), leaving the County
    (34%),	visit  friends  or  go to hotel or stay home  or  "other"
    (21M),	"don't know" (21%).   Those are preference  declarations;
    othier studies indicate there is a significant variation from
    preference	to actual behavior.   Additionally,  the severity  of
    impending	storms  may  also	change	decisions,	as   increased
    community-wide   evacuation	needs	limit  or	eliminate   the
    hotel/friends/public shelter/stay home prediction.

    At  this  time,  the  County has nine  public  shelters,  with  a              |
    capacity (at 20 square feet per person) of 4,089 persons.   These
    shelters are summarized in Table 4. They are depicted on Map 3.                1

    In  Hendry County,  there are an estimated 323 hotel/motel rooms.
    Since the county is outside all storm surge zones, theoretically
    these  rooms will always be available.   The 323 units  (at  100%
    occupancy)	would satisfy 19% of the demand for shelter space	in.
    July  and	11%  in November in a Category  1  storm.   Since	the
    evacuees in Hendry County are from mobile homes, these numbers do
    not change for the remaining category hurricanes.

    In  summary,	the public and commercial hotel/motel shelter space
    will  satisfy	100% of the demand for shelter space in  July  but
    only 58% in November in all categories of hurricanes.

    With  an overall shortage of public or private commercial  space,
    evacuees  have  only the options of (a) staying with friends  who
    are in safer areas within the county or of (b) leaving the county
    for  areas  of  the  state  expected  to  be  less  affected   by
    the hurricane.

    I

    m  m m m m m m  m m mm m m m m m m m-

    I LAKE
    /
    5,EE
    SR80
    &-8
    4-

    33

    SR 29
    C
    E

    -  C832  1
    C 832
    H
    H
    I
    I
    -,4
    SHELTERS h
    Clewiston Area

    1.	CLEWISTOH HIGH SCHOOL
    2.	CLEWISTON MIDDLE SCHOOL
    3.	CLEWISTON PRIMARY SCHOOL
    4.	HARLEM COMMUNITY CIVIC AUDITORIUM
    5. JOHN B. BOY AUDITORIUM

    LaBelle Area

    6.	LABELLE CIVIC CENTER
    7.	LABELLE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
    8.	LABELLE HIGH SCHOOL
    9.	LABELLE MIDDLE SCHOOL

    MAP 3
    HENDRY COUNTY
    RED CROSS MANAGED
    PUBLIC SHELTER LOCATIONS
    -  C833
    _____   C846

    TABLE 4
    HENDRY COUNTY PUBLIC SHELTERS
    Capacity at
    20 sq. ft.
    per person
    Red Cross Managed
    She] ters

    Clewiston Area
    Clewiston High School
    Clewiston Middle School
    Clewiston Primary School
    Harlem Community Civic
    Auditorium
    John B. Boy Auditorium

    LaBelle Area
    LaBelle Civic Center
    LaBelle Elementary
    LaBelle High School
    LaBelle Middle School

    TOTAL SHELTERS - 9

    Because Hendry County
    Address
    I
    West Osceola Avenue
    Owen & Margaret Ave.
    Owen Avenue
    2nd Ave. & Carolina

    Owen Avenue

    Hickpochee Avenue
    Devils Garden Road
    Devils Garden Drive
    Ft. Thompson Avenue
    593
    480
    245
    200
    251

    500
    165
    1,205
    450
    TOTAL CAPACITY - 4,089 persons
    I
    is outside the flood surge zone (and,
    normally only mobile homes are evacuated), there should not be
    many additional people displaced beyond those who evacuate
    because of high winds (See Table 5).*
    I
    TABLE 5
    POPULATION DISPLACEMENT RATIO
    I
    _  ____  _________POPULATION        ______
    DISPLACED	NOT DISPLACED          RATIO
    JULY  NOVEMBER	JULY  NOVEMBER      JULY  NOVEMB� R
    STORM
    CATEGORY
    I
    I
    '
    I
    I
    I
    All
    4,987   8,699
    ~2l,204 ~25,249
    1:4.3   1:2.9
    Thus,	persons	wishing to seek shelter with friends  should  not
     have	trouble	finding   space  provided   they   make   timely
    arrangements.  The SWFRPC 1981 Evacuation Plan estimates that 13%
    of the evacuating population will take this option.

    This  percentage  added  to the above  July/November  percentages
    absorb the remainder of "in county" shelter demand  satisfaction.
    These figures are summarized in Table 6.

    *Behavioral surveys have shown that under certain circumstances,
    people  who	live	in "safe" areas and are  not  ordered  to
    evacuate,	will	still  leave  for  their   own   reasons.
    Therefore,	shelter  usage  and transportation times may  be
    somewhat higher figures than shown.

    r�~ ', ,tT-                       . E-8

    IT-E-E
    I
    I

    TABLE 6
    HENDRY COUNTY SHELTER SPACE SATISFACTION RATEs

    Storm         Evacuees          Public	Hotel/Motel	Stay with
    Category  July  November Shelter Space/%	Space*/%	Friends/%
    July  /  Nov.	July / Nov.	July / Nov.

    All    4,987   8,699        4,089(J)   +	969(J)  +    648(J)
    4,089(N)	969(N)      1,131(N)
    82%(J)	+	19%(J) + not needed(J)
    47%(N)	+	11%(N) +    13%(N)

    = 100% shelter space met within County in July
    = 71% shelter space met within,County in November

    *323 units X 3.0 pph X 100% occupancy

    Since  there  are  those  that have  expressed  an  out-of-county
    shelter preference and since there is an overall peak season
    shortage of in-county shelter, a knowledge of evacuation routes
    and capacities is essential.

    Routes

    Arterial roadways form the backbone of any hurricane evacuation
    effort. Hendry County's roadway system provides a good choice of
    options for evacuees (See Map 4). Identification of routes is the
    first  step in assessing the roadway system.   The next  step  is
    assessing  roadway capacities.   The capacities of these roadways
    have been developed based on their characteris.tics, tied to the
    assessment methodologies of the Highway Capacity Manual, 1985.
    These capacities are contained in Table 7 and show that the
    roadways (at the 50/50 split) vary from a high hourly capacity at
    service level D of 2,300 trips for US 27, to a low of 420 trips
    for CR 78.

    An  important  aspect of any route is its condition.   Winds  and.
    rainfall flooaing will affect the reliability of the routes.
    Many  routes  are low lying.   Their propensity to flood  due  to
    rainfall causes their reliability to operate as an evacuation
    route to cease several hours before storm landfall.

    Whereas, gale winds may precede a hurricane by 5 to 8 hours,
    rainfa].l flooding may constitute a greater hazard to evacuation
    route operation than early winds.   This is because roadways  may
    flood and become partially or totally impassible early in an
    evacuation.  Such areas have been documented for different storms
    and are depicted onr Map 5.   These are areas that must be  passed
    before the presupposed onset of heavy rains, which is at least
    eight  hours  before  eye landfall.   This is  relevant  for  all
    categories of storms.

    la '~~~~~~~~~~~~~.': .  .                                  .'    .,-8,,  AD'SN   S; 1;-
    II-E-9

    I
    LAKE "
    GLADES  CO0.
    SR 80----
    I
    C 833

    - rC 832-
    -c 832-
    H
    H

    til
    I      -
    C)
    xSR 82
    I
    '111'r%
    .1:..

    ,._O 1 2 3 4 MILES
    %  .. I I . .
    ._WFRPC-RNC
    -C833-
    C833
    .1    ~~~~~MAP 4

    HENDRY COUNTY
    EvAcUATION ROUTES

    - m-!mm - -- --m~ -- - mm - --

    - - ---- - - -   - - -e - - -m- m

    TABLE 7
    EVACUATION ROUTE CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
    HENDRY COUNTY
    PER'-
    CENT NO
    IIIGIIWAY	PASSING
    TYPE	ZONES
    M AXIMUM
    HIRLY. FLOW/
    FLOW RATE
    (LOS D)
    TRAFFIC
    FLOW
    SPI, IT
    50/50
    LANE
    # OF	WIDTHI
    BIANES	(FT. )
    DESIGN
    SP EED
    (MPrI)
    R OITIT
    US 27
    Glades Co. to CR 720
    CR 720 to Palm Beach Co.

    SR 80
    Lee Co. to LaBelle
    LaBelle to US 27
    2,300
    2,049

    1,032
    1,413
    4	12
    4	12

    2	12
    2	12
    70	Rur.Div.
    70	Sub.Div.

    70        --	100
    70	80
    2,300
    2,049

    516
    707
    H
    H
    CI
    ..SR 82
    Lee Co.  to Collier Co.
    556

    420

    463
    496

    586
    2	12

    2	10
    70
    80
    ,11]2

    ...;
    '840

    925
    992

    1,172
    r SR 29
    Glades Co. to Collier Co.

    CR 833
    SR 80 to CR 846
    CR 846 to Broward Co.

    CR 846
    Collier Co. to CR 832
    60
    80
    2
    2
    9
    9
    60
    60
    80
    80
    2        10
    60
    70
    CR 832 Wcest
    SR 29 to CR 833

    CR 832 East
    CR 846 to US 27

    CR 78
    .:Lee Co. to SR 29
    ;
    2	10

    2	10

    2	10
    60
    70
    1,153

    1,197

    979
    577

    599

    490
    60
    80
    60
    90
    The Peak Ilour Factor was
    was assumed to be .75 in
    NOTE:
    assumed to be .95 and the Driver Population Factor
    ALL cases

    1AKErC091
    ICKE/OE
    GLADES   CO0.
    I -   6=-- -
    SRSO -                   -----
    C 78
    I

    r-
    m

    0
    z
    -i
    C 833
    SR 29

    I

    C 832-

    C 832 -0  1
    H
    H

    I
    ,SR 82
    COLLIER CO.

    SWFRPC 87- RNC

    C 84 6
    I
    C833
    MAP5S

    HENDRY COUNTY

    ROUTES SUBJECT TO RAINFALL FLOODING

    -                -m  --                    -             -              -          -                ---- m-
    -               ----mmm  m

    Clearance Times
     There  arc  several  contributing  factors  towards   calculating
    community clearance time.  The first is the nature of the threat.
    With each storm of increasing strength, the number of persons and
    vehicles evacuating also increases.

    The second factor contributing to clearance time is the number of
    vehicles	evacuating  and  the  capacity  of  roadways  to  carry
    evacuees.	This translates into a number of hours it will take to
    move persons past any given point.
    *
    The third factor is the volume and distance of "stopping"
    opportunities  offered  evacuees,   and  the  distance  to  these
    U      opportunities.	If  the  total
    volume of stopping	opportunities
    needed  are  ten	miles inland,  the time is  much	less  for  an
    evacuation than if they are 100 miles distant.

    *E      These  three  factors compose the evacuation time.   For  certain
    communities within the County, times are less than for others.
    This  variation is because pre-landfall flood conditions are  not
    I      as  bad,  shelter  locations  are closer,  and there  are  better
    quality evacuation routes. Table 8 summarizes pre-landfall flood
    conditions, Table 9 summarizes shelter distances and options, and
    m Table 10  summarizes  the  time  it  takes  to  clear  the   most
    restrictive point on the route for each community.

    TABLE 8
    PRE-LANDFALL FLOODLWIND CONDITIONS
    Zone

    All
    Storm
    Category

    1.
    2
    E

    SIIELTER
    _______ Time to ---
    Rainfall/Flood   Gale Force Wind
    8
    8
    8
    5.5
    6.5
    8.0
    TABLE 9
    DESIGNATION OPTIONS
    Estimated Travel
    Time (Max.)
    Shelter Name
    Category
    Zone
    All (Mobile
    HItomes)

    All (Mobile
    Homes)
    Clewiston/
    Big
    Cypress

    LaBelle/
    Felda
    Clewiston High School    1.0 hr.
    Clewiston Middle School
    Clewiston Primary School
    Hlarlem Community Civic
    Auditorium
    John B. Boy Auditorium

    LaBelle Civic Center       0.5
    LaBelle Elementary
    LaBelle ligh School
    Lafelle Miadle' Schoo 'I
    l
    .-- I I
    II -E -.13

    TABLE 10
    TIME TO CLEAR
    Time to
    Vehic]e Load    Time    County
    July / Nov. July / Nov. Line
    Restricting   Route
    Zone      Ploint    Capacity
    Category
    All
    (Mobile
    Hlomes)
    Clewiston/ US 27
    Big Cypress
    2,049
    892/1,556
    0.4/0.8
    1.3
    .5         1
    420      937/1,634
    All
    (Mobile
    Homes)
    LaBelle/
    Felda
    SR 29
    2.2/3.8
    Because there are only two evacuation zones and each has its own
    route and restricting point, zones should not be competing with
    each other.  That being the case, the ultimate constricting point
    arises due to evacuation from Lee County along SR 80 as can be
    seen in Table 11.

    TABLE 11
    ULTIMATE CONSTRICTING ROUTE
    I
    I
    I
    Time
    July     November
    Constricting Route
    Category
    All
    (Mobile Homes)
    SR 29/SR 80 from*
    Lee County/US 27
    5.2
    7.8
    I
    The   greatest  County  exiting  time  (see  Table  12)  will  be
    experienced along SR 80 if a conflict arises from a Lee County
    Evacuation.   This would most likely only happen in a landfa]ling
    or paralleling storm from the Gulf and not from the Atlantic.

    Because of the population centers and evacuation routes available
    in  the  county,  out of county evacuation would probably	follow
    these  natural  boundaries.      LaBelle/Felda  would  use	SR  80,
    Clewiston/Big Cypress would use US 27.   If this scenario in fact
    occurs, the county exiting route times would be as shown in Table
    12.
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    *LaBelle/Fe].da  "time to clear" from Table 10 plus 3.0  hours
    July and 4.0 hours in November for Lee County time to clear.
    in
    I
    >' '                       "' : "
    :::; '. ..:':":~-.-' .-	., ;'- "	"	;'
    "	.	W	:I
    .: '	' :'	.. . ,	-	" ' ::.;" ..
    	,	I" .	. "	.

    I	'
    I'
    II-E--14

    TABLE 12
    COUNTY EXITING ROUTES

    Total. Veh.	% of Total
    Leaving	Evacuating                        Times
    Category  Zone    County	Vehicles   Route   Capacity  July   Nov.
    *|~~~ ~July/Nov.

    All LaBelle/
    Felda      318/555       34%	SR 80     848      0.4    0.7

     All  Clewiston/	'
    Big Cypress 304/529       34-	US 27   2,300	0.1    0.2

    I      The  last factor to be incorporated into calculating  the	County
    clearance	time  is	the	response of potential  evacuees	to  an
     evacuation	order.	The	original  1981-82  Regional	Hurricane
    I  !  Evacuation Plan discussed this topic on page 125,  and	concluded
    that seven hours would be the minimum time needed to clear a
    zone, because some evacuees would dawdle more than others. More
     recent  history	indicates  that sudden or  dramatic	changes  in
     hurricanes  can	heighten the evacuees response  into	a  "quick"
    evacuation, limited basically by road capacity. Consequently, in
    evaluating   the	final   criteria	that  determines   a   slow,
     intermediate,  or	quick evacuation,	both slow and  intermediate
    zones will have a minimum response time of seven  hours;	"quick"
    U , times, however, will be limited only by roadway capacity.	All of
    these  factors combine into creating a countywide clearance time.
    This time will vary depending upon the routes available for out
    of county evacuation, the time of season, and whether it is a
    slow,  intermediate,  or quick response.  Table 13 summarizes the
     contribution  to the greatest clearance time for the  County  for
    each category storm.

    TABLE 13
    TOTAL EVACUATION TIMES

    ~~i~~~~~~~~ ~~~~Summary
    Route Times	(Total Time)
         Category  Destination(l)  Weather(2)	July	Nov.	July	Nov.

    All         2.0             8	2.2	3.8	12.2	1,3.8

    |    (1)	From Table 9 or 10, whichever is greater
    (2)	From Table 8

    IF

    ! :                    -     .             .     .  ,.        .   -  t.;.:
    .   ..1
    IT-E-.15

    PART II - 1991 FORECASTS

    Part of hurricane preparedness involves anticipating future
    growth.   This	element discusses short term growth (4 years) and
    the  facilities	that are expected to be in place to  serve  that
    growth.	Facilities	in  this  sense  include	transportation
    (highway)	improvements	and school construction	(since  schools
    often serve as shelters).

    Since Hiendry County has a relatively small population and
    historically has shown slow population growth (averaging less
    than  800  people per year since  1980-), -the  growth  prediction
    follows  a simple straight line technique.   Applied uniformly to
    dwelling units, population and vehicles., the increases to 1991
    are shown in Tables 14, 15, and 16.

    TABLE 14
    HENDRY COUNTY - HOUSING ESTIMATE FOR 1991
    (Based on projected Housing Units of 9,794)
    I
    Mobile	Recreational
    Home	Vehicle
    Multi-Family__
    Apartment   Condo
    Hotel-
    Motel   Total
    Residential
    Single-Family
    I
    I
    Zone
    LaBelle/
    Felda

    C]ewiston/
    Big Cypress
    2,453

    2,644
    1,007

    1,582
    888

    409
    44

    363
    0

    80
    129	4,521

    195	5,273
    I
    2,589
    1,297
    407
    80
    324    9, 794
    TOTALS
    5,097
    I
    TABLE 15
    - HENDRY COUNTY - PEAK SEASON POPULATION
    ESTIMATE FOR 1991 (Based on projected Housing Units of 9,794)
    I
    Residential
    Single-Family
    Mobile Recreational
    Home     Vehicle
    Multi-Family__
    Apartment   Condo
    Hotel--
    Motel
    Total
    I
    I
    I
    'Laleclle/
    Fe lda
    Clewistonr/
    Big Cyprcss
    7,065

    7,615
    2,266

    3,560
    1,092

    503
    129

    1,067
    0

    139
    290	10,812

    439	13,322
    ].39         729    24,].65
    TOTALS
    1.4,67
    9
    5,825
    1 ,595
    1,197
    I
    A
    I
    I
    [T-E-16

    TABLE 15 (continuedl
    HENDRY COUNTY - OFF PEAK SEASON POPULATION ESTIMATE FOR 1991
    (Based on Projected Housing Units of 9,794)

    Residential	Mobile   Recreational.	Multi-Family
    Single-Family	Home      Vehicle	Apartment	Condo

    6,991	1,299	480	123	0

    7,535	4,509	221].'	1,035	228
    Hotel
    Motel

    166

    556

    I Total

    9,059

    14,083
    I            'Zone

    LaBelle/
    Felda
    1      Clewiston/
    Big Cypress

    I TOTALS
    1,157
    14,526
    5,808
    701
    228
    722   23,142
    TABLE 16
    HENDRY COUNTY - PEAK SEASON TRAFFIC ESTIMATE FOR 1991
    (Based on Projected Housing Units of 9,794)

    Residential	Mobile	Recreational	Multi-Family __
    Single-Family	Home	Vehicle	Apartment	Condo

    2,590	755	413	47	0

    2,792	1,187	168	391	51
    Hfotel-
    Motel	Total

    106	3,911

    161	4,750
    m	Zone

    I
    	LaBell.e
    /
    I ~Felda
    Clewiston/
    I      ;Big
    Cypress

    TOTALS
    5,382
    1,942
    438
    51
    267    8,661
    581
    HENDRY COUNTY
    (Based

    Residential
    Single-Family

    2,563

    2,763
    - OFF PEAK SEASON TRAFFIC ESTIMATE FOR 1991
    on Projected Housing Units of 9,794)

    Mobile  Recreational	Multi-Family
    Home     Vehi.cle	Apartment	Condo

    433	160	45	0

    680	74	371.	39
    Hlotel
    Motel

    61

    92
    Zone

    LaBel le/
    Felda
    r'lewiston/
    ,.ig Cypress
    Total

    3,262

    4,019
    TOTALS
    5,326
    1,113
    233
    416
    39
    153    7,281
    I"'''" '.    .               " 'u t'               - ,, :-  �  .  ,  "...'
    II-E-17

    In terms of shelter, there are three new schools forecast for the
    County  along with several additions and improvements to be  made
    to  existing	schools.   Total  size  and capacity  can  only  be
    approximated;	the  best guess estimate is given as a  new  total
    capacity in Table 17.

    TABLE 17
    IN-COUNTY SHELTER SATISFACTION

    PUBLIC       IIOTEL/MOTEL	STAY W/
    STORM	EVACUEES  SHELTER SPACE/% - SPACE*/%	FRIENDS/%
    CATEGORY	JULY/NOV     JULY/NOV      JULY/NOV.	JULY/NOV.
    m
    All     6,509 7,420    5,905   +	1,200(J) + not needed(J)
    91%(J) +	1,200(N) + not needed(N)
    80%(N)	18% (J)                          I
    16% (N)

    = 100% shelter met in County in July
    = 100% shelter met in County in November

    * 400 units X 3.0 pph X 100%

    It	appears  that all necessary shelter will be available  within
    the	County.   However,  since  there  still  may  be  additional
    voluntary evacuation and people choosing to leave the county,  it
    is necessary to again examine routes and capacities as they  will
    exist in 1991.

    For the purpose of this study, it is again assumed that up to 30%
    of  all available vehicles might evacuate.   The only significant
    evacuation  route  improvement  to be in place  by  1991  is  the
    widening  of SR 29 so that lane widths will increase from 10 feet
    to  12 feet.	This will increase capacity from 756 vehicles  per
    hour to 945.	The new clearance time is shown in Table 18.

    TABLE 18
    TOTAL EVACUATION TIMES

    ROUTE TIME	SUMMARY
    CATEGORY   DESTINATION   WEATHIER	JULY	NOV.	JULY	NOV.

    All         2.0           8	2.2	3.8	12.2	].3.8

    Because	the time to leave the county is' longer than the time	to
    shelter,	the  improvements  to SR 29 are marginal  in  terms	of
    hurricane evacuat.ion.

    I
    !
    ~~~...:. ...,        0 .. .   ",~-;
    '    .."'. .'.'':'..' '1                ..........."........':.............'........-"'................'::'....................-'".....................'   .'( '::'.. .' ':"
    .''.........':;.::  ,,3 ;'":~ ;; ,,, '-"L
    !
    II-E-18
    I

    GLADES COUNTY - TABLE OF CONTENTS

    Section                                             Page #

    Hurricane Vulnerability ..............................II-F-1
    Recent Storm History ................................. II-F-4
    Affected Population .................................. IIT-F-4
    Motor Vehicles ...................................... II-F-5
    Shelters ......................................          II-F-6
    Routes ............................................... II-F-9
    Clearance Times ...................................... II-F-13
    1991 Forecasts ........................ ..............II-F-16

    APPENDIX - Hazard Times ............................... 1

    LIST OF MAPS
    Map                                                   Page #

    I. Hurricane Wind Impact Zones ....................... II-F-2
    2.	Flood and Wind Vulnerability Zones ................II-F-3
    3.	Red Cross Managed Public Shelter Locations ........II-F-8
    4. Evacuation Routes ................................. II-F-10
    5.  Routes Subject to Hainfall Flooding ............... II-F-ll

    LIST OF TABLES
    Table                                                  Page #

    1. Housing Units ..................................... II-F-4
    2. Population Estimates ..............................II-F-5
    3. Vehicle Estimates ................................. II-F-6
    4. Shelters .......................................... II-F-8
    5. Shelter Satisfaction ..............................II-F-9
    6.	Evacuation Route Capacity Calculation .............II-F-12
    7.	Pre-Landfall Flood/Wind Conditions ................ II-F--13
    8. Shelter Designations Options ...................... II-F-14
    9. Time to Clear   .....................................IT-F-14
    10. County Exiting Routes .............................. II-F-I5
    11. Total Evacuation Time .............................II-F-15
    12. HIousing Units, 1991 ............................... II-F-16
    13. Population Estimates, 1991 ........................ II-F-16
    ]4. Traffic Estimates, 1991 ............................    II-F-17
    15. Shelter Satisfactions, 1991 .......................II-F-18
    16. Total Time, 1991 .................................. II-F-18
    * : *S Se: : e~~~~~. ,.                                               ; i~            ..  ,; 1'.., :

    GLADES COUNTY
    PEACETIME EMERGENCY PLAN (Hurricanes)

    HURRICANE VULNERABILITY

    I  The  hurricane vulnerability of Glades County has  been  analyzed
    using a numerical storm surge prediction model known as SLOSH,
    short for Sea,  Lake,  and Overland Surges from  Hurricanes.   In
    I  fact, the SLOSII model was first applied:-to Lake Okeechobee.  This
    model is described in detail in the Reiol Hurcn  Eauto
    I  Plan,   1981-82,  prepared  by  the  Southwest  Florida  Regional
    Planning Council; as well. as A Storm'Surge Atlas for Southwest
    Florida,   prepared  by  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric
    Administration,  Undated,  @1983).   These reports analyzed some
    3  187  separate  storms  for their potential  impact  on  Southwest
    Florida. Both reports provide an assessment of methodologies and
    provide assumptions that can act towards increasing or decreasing
    *	forecast flood and wind conditions.   However,  in  summary,  the
    *	following assumptions can be made.

    I	(1)  Landfalling storms provide the worst flooding potential

    (2) Flooding will be worse south of the eye of the hurricane

    (3) Wind conditions making roads unsafe for travel will arrive
    I      ~~well  before  the eye of the hurricane,  and usually  before
    flood waters inundate evacuation routes

    (4)  Storm  landfall  prediction is not an  exact  science.   Any
    I      ~~approaching  storm has the capacity to strengthen  or  veer,
    decreasing or increasing the flooding anid surge potential of
    3       ~~the storm.

    However, in the-case of Glades County, the'model does not predLat-
    Iany flooding over the dike from Lake Okeechobee unless the lake
    level is over 18 feet (the preferred control level is 16 feot)
    and only then in a very severe hurricane. The assumption here is
    I  that if the lake is approaching IS feet,  the locks can be opened
    to reduce it to the desired control level of 16 feet.

    The hurricane problem facingir Glades Coun-ty is high winds (See Map
    1).   This  is  a  problem because mobile homes are  required  to
    I  evacuate in all categories of hurricanes.   There are more mobile
    home/travel trailer units in the County than any other type of
    dwelling unit and they contain almost 50% of the population.

    The County has been divided into vulnerability zones based on
    population, shelter locations and the transportation network.
    *  See Map 2 for the zones.
    II-F-1

    U
    3\
    N

    N

    I
    ',
    /
    N
     I
    \

    I   ,

    !
    /
    I/'
    I I
    I
    I
    I

    I

    I
    I

    I

    I
    I

    I          I

    - -       -                            - -
    Legend                                                       --

    40 MPH SUSTAINEo 64 MILE COUNTY RADIUS -CATEGORY I
    WIND LINE          76                   -CATEGORY 2
    Z HOUR WARNING
    2HUWALINE          98                   -CATEGORY 3

    O"' ';0   SWFRPC
    81- RNC
    'MAP "
    GLADES COUNTY
    HURRICANE WIND IMPACT ZONE
    II-F-2

    Im/mmIiImm/IImmmmIII
    H
    H

    UI
    I
    I

    L:

    j!

    B4
    MAP 2
    GLADES COUNTY
    FLOOD'AND WIND VULNERABILITY ZONES

    Recent Storm History
    Hurricane  Donna  was  the  last hurricane  to  affect	Southwest                U
    Florida  to any significant degree.   At the time  the	hurricane
    hit, the County's population was 3,000, concentrated primarily in
    Moore Haven, Pailmdale and Buckhead Ridge.

    Hurricane	Floyd provided the area a scare on October  16,  1987.
    However,	it  veered  due  east before the  County  received  any
    impacts beyond high wind gusts.       ,

    Affected Population

    The	first element in preparing an estimate of County  population
    is	to estimate dwelling units,  and dwelling unit types.   Using
    Planning   Department  and  Building  and   Zoning   information,                I
    supplemented by information on RV Parks from the Department of
    Health  and Rehabilitative Services,  it is estimated that  there
    are 4,278 dwellings in the county (See Table 1).   This  estimate
    includes  conventional housing,  mobile homes,  and  transitional
    housing such as inhabited travel trailers, and hotel and motel
    units.                                                                           5

    TABLE 1
    GLADES COUNTY - HOUSING UNITS

    Residential	Mobile Home    Multi-Family ... Hotel-
    Zone      Single-Family	Rec. Vehicle  Apartment	Condo	Motel	Total

    Moore Haven	504	559	61	N/P*	186	1,310

    Ortona	189	293	N/P	N/P	N/P	482

    Fisheating Creek	100	154	N/P	N/P	N/P	254-

    Lakeport/
    Buckhead Ridge	1,093	1,082	22	N/P	35	2,232

    TOTALS	1,886	2,088	83	N/P	221	4,2783

    *No Projection

    Using  this estimate,  a population estimate is then	made.	Two
    additional	assumptions,   however,   are  needed:	persons	per
    household,	and  vacancy rate.   The first was estimated to be  a
    I
    *standard 2.6 persons per household, regardless of unit' Whereas
    this	assumption has inaccuracies,  the end result probably	does
    not	differ  significantly from a more detailed  analysis.	More
    detailed analysis,	however, is needed to determine vacancy rates
    for  unit  Lype,	since  different  unit  types  have� different
    vutnerabi tity to flood or wind 'h'azards'.' -'Using 'a. survey estimate .--.'
    !

    used  in	Regional Hurricane Evacuation  Plan,  Appendix	C,	two
    estimates	of  seasonal  vacancy were  prepared.   These	are	as
    follows:

    Unit Type               Seasonal Occupancy Rates
    3|~~~~~~ ~~July                                  November

    Single-Family Unit	0.95%	0.96%
    Apartment	0.70	0.78
    I|    ~ Condominium (Conventional)	0.5.1	0.64
    Rec. Vehicle/Mobile Home	0.43	0.75
    Hotel/Motel	0.54	0.63

    I      Since the residents of Glades County will not normally be subject
    to hurricane surge flooding, the evacuating population will be
    primarily  from  mobile  homes.   (There is  some  evidence  from
     behavioral studies that other residences will be evacuated by the
    occupants  even though they are in "safe" areas and will probably
    not  be  ordered to evacuate.)   The mobile  home  population  in
    Glades County in July is estimated to be about 2,334 and 4,072 in
     November.   Since  mobile  homes are required to evacuate in  all
    hurricanes, this represents the evacuating population as well.

    |I~~~~ ~~TABLE 2
    GLADES COUNTY
    EVACUATING POPULATION ESTIMATES FOR EVACUATION ZONES
    U|             ,      h~~~ALL STORM CATEGORIES

    ZONE                          ESTIMATE
    (Mobile Homes/             JULY           NOVEMBER
    I
    Recreational Vehicles)

    E3   ~      Moore Haven	625           1,090

    Ortona_	328	571

    3               Fisheating Creek	172	300

    Lakeport/Buckhead Ridge	1,210	2,110

    UI~~ ~TOTAL	2,334	4,072

    Motor Vehicles

    Nearly all of the population affected by an oncoming hurricane
    will evacuate by private vehicle.   The question arises over  how
    many vehicles will be used in the evacuation.  Issues relevant to
    this include the number of vehicles owned, whether owners would
    be willing to leave any vehicles behind (since next to the home,
    vehicles are the most expensive possession),  whether all drivers
    I     feel  confident  to operate a vehicle in- storm  conditions,  and
    whether	evacuating	families wish to be, separated	:' .di-ffer~enn,d , :W   .:
    mo'tor	vehicles	Based' on  surveys,   respondent's	indicated'
    T T-F-5

    !

    approximately	75%  of  available vehicles would be  used  in  an
    evacuation.	(Hurricane Evacuation Plan, 1981-82, SWFRPC).  This
    averaged out to 1.1 vehicles per occupied unit.

    Using this ratio of cars and the occupancy ratio used previously,
    the number of county vehicles used in an evacuation in July would
    be 988,  and in November would be 1,723.  Table 3 summarizes  the
    I
    vehicle generation by each community.

    TABLE 3
    GLADES COUNTY VEHICLE ESTIMATES OF
    EVACUATION FROM MOBILE HOMES/RECREATIONAL VEHICLES

    July      -November
    Storm	# vehicles	# vehicles
    Category        Zone	evacuating	evacuating

    All      Moore Haven	264	461

    Ortona	139	242

    Fisheating Creek	73	127

    Lakeport/	512	893
    Buckhead Ridge

    TOTAL                988	1,723

    TOTAL VEHICLES IN COUNTY   3,154	3,939

    __                                                    ~~~~~~~~~~~I
    Shelters

    Evacuees must have a place to go.   The SWFRPC undertook  surveys
    in 1979 and 1981 to determine evacuee preferences.   This data is
    summarized as follows: public shelters (24%), leaving the Counfy
    (34-),  visit  friends  or  go to hotel or stay home  or  "other"
    I
    (21%),  "don't know" (21%).   Those are preference  declarations;
    other studies indicate there is a significant variation from
    preference	to actual behavior.   Additionally,  the severity  of
    impending	storms  may  also	change	decisions,   as   increased
    community-wide   evacuation	limits	or  eliminates  the   hotel/
    friends/public shelter/stay home prediction.

    At  this  time,  the County has twelve public  shelters,  with  a
    capacity (at 20 square feet per person) of 3,340 persons.   These
    shelters are summarized in Table 4.  They are depicted on Map  3.
    At  this writing,  the shelters are being re-evaluated and  their
    inventory updated.   That information will be included as soon as
    it is avai]lable.

    IlT-F6                                          |

    I I-F- 6[

    TABLE 4
    GLADES COUNTY PUBLIC SHELTERS
    Capacity
    20 sq. ft.
    Address                       per person
    Red Cross Managed
    SheiteL:
    I .Moore Haven Area
    American Legion Bldg.
    Doyle Conner Aud.
     First Methodist Church
    I IMoore Haven Elementary
    Moore Haven High School
     Washington Park Com-
    I :     munity Complex
    Baker Highway
    US 27 W.
    3rd St. & Avenue L
    8th St. & Avenue K-
    US 27 between 6th & 8th
    Washington Park/Gamble
    Street
    Not Available
    480*
    Not Available
    Not Available
    2,355
    Not Available
    LaBelle Area
    I .Muse Fire Station/
    Community Center
    Ortona Fire Station
    a & Community Center
    140
    State Route 1

    SR 78/Ortona Road
    112
    Okeechobee Area
    Buckhead Ridge Com-
    I munity Center
    Buckhead Ridge Fire
    _  . Station
    Rt. 4 & SR 78

    Rt. 4 & SR 78
    Not Available

    Not Available
    Lakeport Area
    Lakeport Fire Station   CR 74
    & Community Center
    Maple Grove Baptist       SR 78
    Church

    TOTAL SHELTERS - 12
    Not Available

    Not Available

    TOTAL CAPACITY - approx. 3,339
    * Planned for Expansion
    B    In Glades County, there are about 221 hotel/motel units.  Most of
    these are located near Lake Okeechobee, but will probably not be
    subject to hurricane-generated surge flooding.   For this reason,
    all units are considered available regardless of the magnitude of
    the storm.

     The  221  units,  at 100% occupancy (3 persons  per  room)  would
    satisfy 89% of the current space demand in July, but only 22% in
    November.   Because  the  evacuees are almost exclusively  mobile
     home  residents  who evacuate in all  categories  of  hurricanes,
     these numbers are applicable for Category I through 5 hurricanes.

    In   summary,   public	shelter  space  added   to   hotel/motel
    availability  will  meet	1.00% of the demand in July and  90%  in
    Novembert. Normally,  a lack of publi.c and commercial space will
    leave	evacuees with only two options:  (a) leave the county	for
     areas	expected to be less affected or (b) stay with friends	who
    II-F-7

    V.
    i SHELTERS

    I MOORE HAVEN HIGH SCHOOL
    2 DOYLE CONNOR COMMUNITY CEN.
    3 AMERICAN LEGION HALL
    4 FIRST METHODIST CHURCH
    5 FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH
    6 WATER TREATMENT PLANT
    7 ORTONA FIRE DEPARTMENT
    8 BUCKHEAD RIDGE COMMUNITY CEN.
    9 BUCKHEAD RIDGE FIRE DEPT.
    10 LAKEPORT FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH
    II LAKEPORT COMMUNITY CEN. AND FIRE DEPr.
    12 PALMDALE COMMUNITY CEN,
    13 MUSE COMMUNITY CEN.

    8'9

    GLADES  COUNTY

    10
    I~I&

    LAKE ONEECHOOEE

    \  444ti~~~~~~I
    2~~~~~~~~~~

    29

    . 13                     -78
     -13

    20  15	07
    f 0v	80
    I
    H
    H

    r

    ELEVATIONS
    SOURCE: NOAA

     20
    [ 15
    12 34  5
    SWfRPC
    Miles
    I

    j2	S                                   /
    n,	t)          -       4
    QLUB*Q	vo,1rDar7
    CLADES  Ce
    GLAIEv     Cv.
    HtENHDRY CO.
    ISWFR P  ' rnc

    ! i�
    MAP 3
    EMERGENCY SHELTER LOCATIONS
    _   ,     -- _,  GLA ES ,UN;& _M_ __ __

    are in safe areas'of the County and not in mobile  homes.   Since
    the County has almost 2,000 site-built homes and apartment
    buildings, mobile home evacuees should have no trouble finding
    shelter with friends provided they make arrangements in a timely
    manner.

    TABLE 5
    GLADES COUNTY SHELTER SPACE SATISFACTION RATEs

    Storm        Evacuees          Public      Hotel/Motel	Stay with
    Category  July  November  Shelter Space, Space*/%	Friends
    July  /  Nov.  July / Nov.	July / Nov.
    All
    2,334   4,072  -3,340 J
    -3,340 N
    100% J
    82% N
    +	575 J	+	303 J
    +	575 N	+	529 N
    + not needed J + not needed J
    + 14% N         +   13N
    100% shelter demand met within County (both July
    and November)

     *221 units X 2.6 persons/unit

    Although  theoretically  there  is sufficient	space	within  the
    County, there  are  persons	who may wish  to	leave	the  County,
    regardless of the reason.	Therefore,  a knowledge of routes and
    route capacities is important.

    Routes

    Arterial roadways form the backbone of any hurricane evacuation
    effort.  Glades County's roadway system provides a good choice of
    options for evacuees (depicted on Map 4, "Evacuation Routes").
    Identification of routes is the first step in assessing the
    roadway system.   The next step is assessing roadway  capacities.
    The  capacities - of these roadways have been developed  based	on_u
    their  characteristics,	tied to the assessment methodologies	of
    the  Highway  Capacity	Manual,   1985.    These  capacities	are
    contained  in Table 6,	and show that the roadways (at the  50/50
    split) vary from a high hourly capacity at service level D of
    2,300 trips for US 27, to a low of 471 trips for CR 721.
    An  important  aspect of any route is its condition.   Winds  and
    rainfall flooding will affect the reliability of the routes.
    Rainfall  flooding may constitute a greater hazard to  evacuation
    route operation than early winds.   This is because roadways   may
    flood and become partially or totally impassible early in an
    evacuation.  Such areas have been documented for different storms
    and are depicted on Map 5.   These are areas that must'be	passed
    before	the presupposed onset of heavy rains,	which is at	least
    eight	hours  before  eye landfall.   This is	relevant  for  all
    categories of storms.
    II-F--9

    LEGEND
    - , ARTERIAL

    COLLECTOR
    AVERAGE DAILY
    TRAFFIC
    - SR
    . 788
    43 major(through)evac. roIute
    -4  secondary evac. routes
    I, I
    H
    H

    I
    ft
    I
    1-

    I,$ Sj A       tI
    I�
    i /
    lake

    I.:    :*

     II  :�

    8786
    8,892

     SR 720
    :1 I
    --     SR 74

    SR

    ~,; SR720rp-~

    a .

    :S.
    _
    q
    . i
    .f

    -'-e

    '. , t'.

    /      l    .    .

    ~~R I A.,                                      I-.r~                                             I    I I

    7 a

    2 15(I*.9*
    -. ~ ~    ~          ~          ~          ~          ~         ~         I II -I
    I

    MAP 4
    GLADES COUNTY
    EVACUATION ROUTES
    -, , -r m  -     ,        j-       -         -I m    -  -

    m m m -  - - m - m m m - m  - m - -

    0   1 2  3 4 MILES

    SR80          " HENDRY CO. I                   SWFRPC RNC

    MAP 5
    GLADES COUNTY
    ROUTES SUBJECT TO RAINFALL FLOODING

    TABLE 6
    EVACUATION ROUTE CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
    GLADES COUNTY
    PER-
    CENT NO
    IGHIIWAY	PASSING
    TYPE	ZONES
    MAXIMJUM
    IIRLY. FLOW/
    FLOW RATE
    (LOS D)
    TRAFFIC
    FLOW
    SPLIT
    50/50
    LANE
    # OF	WIDTII
    LANES	(FT.)
    DESIGN
    SPEED
    (MPII)
    ROUTE
    IJS 27
    Highlands Co. to Moore Hlaven 4
    Moore Haven Bridge/
    Approaches	2
    Moore Haven to Hendry Co.	4
    12
    70    Rur.Div.

    60        --
    70    Rur.Div.
    2,300
    2,300

    1, 369
    2,300
    12
    12
    100
    1,369
    2,300
    H
    H   SR,..29
    US 27 to Hendry Co.
    I
    h   SR.?78
    Okeechobee Co. to US 27
    1,162

     1,440
    2       12
    60
    80
    581

    720
    2      12       60
    80
    CR .720
    US 27 Moore llaven to
    US 27 Clewiston
    90       1,046
    2
    9      60
    523
    CR 721
    SR 78 to Highlands Co.

    CR 78 .
    SR 29 to US 27

    CR 74
    Charlotte Co. to SR 29
    941

    1,011

    1,072
    471

    506

    536
    2

    2
    9	60

    9	60
    80
    80
    2       10       60
    80
    The Peak Hour Faqtor was
    Factor was assumed to be
    assumed to be .95
    .75 in ALL cases
    NOTE:
    and the Driver Population
    m    _ -                       _    _   _    _    _    _-    -    -           - _       -    -

    Clearance Times

    There are several factors involved in calculating community
     clearance  time.    The  first  is  the  nature  of  the  threat.
    Generally, with each storm of increasing strength, the number of
    persons  and vehicles evacuating also  increases.   Since  Glades
    evacuees will be from mobile homes,  evacuation may not vary with
    storm intensity; theoretically all evacuees will go in a Category
    1 storm.

    Other factors contributing to clearance time are the number of
    vehicles evacuating and the capacity b'of roadways to carry
    evacuees.   This translates into the number of hours it will take
    to move persons past any given point.

    The final factors are the number of "stopping" opportunities
    offered evacuees,  and the distance to these  opportunities.   If
    the  majority of stopping opportunities needed are only ten miles
    inland, the time is much less for an evacuation than if they are
    100 miles distant.

    These   factors  compose  the  evacuation  time.    For   certain
    communities within the County, times are less than for others.
    This variation is because pre-landfall flood conditions are not
    as bad, shelter locations are closer, and there are better
    quality evacuation routes. Table 7 summarizes pre-landfall flood
    conditions, Table 8 summarizes shelter distances and options, and
    Table   9  summarizes  the  time  it  takes  to  clear  the  most
    restrictive point on the route for each community.
    TABLE 7
    FLOOD/WIND CONDITIONS
    PRE-LANDFALL
    Zone

    All
    Storm
    Category

    1

    2

    3
    Time to
    Rainfall/Flood   Gale Force Wind

    8	5.5

    8	6.5

    8	8.0
    ..     s           ,    ~  :  ..         ...._ ...   ,	.	Se;. .;.                 a	:	.-:. .	:	,,        ..
    .....	.:t :-.	~1~~,.	.,-",-	-.
    II-F-!2

    I
    I
    TABLE 8
    SHELTER DESIGNATION OPTIONS
    Shelter Name
    Zone
    Estimated Travel
    Time (Max.)
    I
    Category
    All (Mobile
    Homes)
    American Legion Bldg.
    Doyle Conner Aud.
    First Methodist Church
    Moore Haven Elementary
    Moore Haven High School
    Washington. PaFk Com-
    munity Center
    .3 hr.
    Moore Haven
    I
    I
    I
    Ortona Fire Station
    All (Mobile
    Homes)
    Ortona
    .25
    I
    I
    All (Mobile
    Homes

    All (Mobile
    Homes
    .3

    1.0
    Fisheating
    Creek

    Lakeport/
    Buckhead
    Ridge
    Muse Fire Station/
    Ortona Fire Station

    Buckhead Ridge/
    Buckhead Ridge Fire
    Station/Moore Haven
    I
    Because there are only four evacuation zones and each
     route  and  restricting point,  zones should only  be
    competing with each other.
    has its own
    marginally
    I
    TABLE 9
    TIME TO CLEAR
    I
    Time to
    County
    Line
    m
    Restricting
    Point

    CR 720
    Route
    Capacity
    Vehicle Load
    July    November
    Time
    July November
    Category
    Zone
    All    Moore Haven
    523
    264 :   461
    0.o,  '    1.1
    0.5

    0Q51
    All    Ortona
    CR 78
    506
    139
    242
    0.3
    0.5
    All

    All
    Fisheating
    Creek

    Lakeport/
    Buckhead
    Ridge
    SR 29

    CR 721
    581
    73       127
    0.1

    1.1
    0.2

    1.7
    0.8 1
    471
    512
    893
    0.5

    I

    Clearly, route constriction becomes a concern when it is unevenly              I
    distributed	between   different  parts  of	the   County.   The
    possibility	exists  that increased traffic	control  can  better
    distribute	loadings.    If  that  is  the	case,	the  ultimate
    constricting  points	move to the sum of the routes	exiting  the
    County.   Table '10	de;picts  the times  th'a.t 'may	.:c-,: 'i ::: . ;..
    different routing scenarios.
    I
    IT-F-14

    TABLE 10
    COUNTY EXITING ROUTES

    Total Vehicles	Z of Total	Combined       Times**
    Category Leaving County	County Vehicles*   Routes	Capacity   July    November
    3	July	Nov.

    All	381	664         34	US 27 and	1,369    .2*       .3**
    * (mobile	CR 721	471
    * homes)	and SR 78  -	506
    2,346

    *  Even though there is total shelter space available within the County, behavioral
    surveys  have indicated that even people in safe areas,  not ordered to evacuate
    |   ~will leave anyway.

    m **  Therefore,  the time  to shelter is more restrictive than the time to exit the
    County.

    The  last factor to be incorporated into calculating  the	County
    clearance	time  is	the	response of potential  evacuees	to  an
    evacuation	order.	The	original  1981-82  Regional	Hurricane
    Evacuation Plan discussed this topic on page 125,  and	concluded
    that  seven  hours  would be the minimum time needed to	clear  a
    zone, because some evacuees would dawdle more than others. More
    recent  history	indicates  that sudden or  dramatic	changes  in
    I    hurricanes  can	heighten the evacuees response  into	a  "quick"
    evacuation, limited basically by road capacity. Consequently, in
    evaluating   the	final   criteria	that  determines   a   slow,
    2    intermediate,  or	quick evacuation,	both slow and  intermediate
    zones will have a minimum response time of seven  hours;	"quick"
    times, however, will be limited only by roadway capacity.	All of
     these	factors  combine to create a  countywide  clearance	time.
    This	time will_vary depending upon the routes available for  o-t'
    of  county evacuation,   the time of season,	and whether it is  a
     slow,  intermediate,  or  quick  response.	Because  of  Glades'
     position  as an inland county and the relatively small number  of
    people evacuating, only the longest time is given to simulate a
    worst  case situation.	Table 11 summarizes the contribution  to
     the  greatest  clearance	time for the County for  each  category
    storm.
    TABLE ll
    TOTAL EVACUATION TIME

    Total
    3*                                                                 Evacuation
    vI~~~~~~ ~~~Clearance Time                                 Time
    Category  Destination(l)  Weather(2)	July  November	July	November

    |        All          1.1              8	1.1    1.7	10.2	10.8

     (1)	From Table 8 or 9,. whichever is greater
    3|       (2)	From Table 7

    3.s~~~~~   ~II-F-15
    *

    The clearance time for the county as a whole will increase if out
    of  county evcuation is forced into a single route.    For example
    under ideal conditions, evacuees could choose between US 27 and
    SR  78/CR 721.    However,   if the storm was approaching  directly
    from  the east or west,   the inclination of people to drive  away
    from the storm could congest one route or the other.    This would
    be compounded by other evacuating counties.

    PART II - 1991 FORECASTS

    Part   of  hurricane  preparedness  involves    anticipating   and
    evaluating near term growth.    This element of the study examines
    population growth to 1991 and the transportation improvements and
    shelter facilities that are expected to come on line by then.
    .~~~~
    Since the population forecast is relatively'short term (and since
    Glades' growth has been relatively slow, averaging fewer than 200
    people  per year since 1980),  the growth predicted is  a  simple
    straight  line increase.	This is then applied uniformly to  the
    communities  for people,	housing and vehicles.    The results are
    depicted in Tables 12, 13, and 14 and are shown for both high and
    low season.

    TABLE 12
    GLADES COUNTY HOUSING ESTIMATE FOR 1991
    (Based on Projected Housing Units of 4,414)

    Residential     Mobile Home/      Multi-Family	Hotel-
    Zone      Single-Family Recreational Vehicle Apartment Condo	Motel	Total

    Moore Haven	520	577	63	N/P*	192	1,352

    Ortona	195	302	N/P	N/P	N/P	497

    Fisheating Creek	103	159	N/P	N/P	N/P	262

    Lakeport/
    Buckhead Ridge	1,128	1,116	23	N/P	36	2,303

    TOTALS	1,946	2,154	86	N/P	228	4,414

    TABLE 13
    GLADES COUNTY PEAK SEASON POPULATION ESTIMATE FOR 1991
    (Based on Projected Housing Units of 4,414)

    Residential     Mobile Home/       Multi-Family    Hotel-
    Zone      Single-Fawily  Recreational Vehicle Apartment	Condo Motel	Total

    Moore Haven	1],352	855	161	N/P*	290	2,658

    Ortona	507	448	N/P	N/P	N/P	955

    Fisheating Creek	269	236	N/P	N/P	N/P	505

    Lakeport/
    Buckheai Ridge	2,933	1,654	59	N/P_ _54	4,700

    TOTALS	5,061	3,193	220	N/P   344	8,818

    * No Projection

    TABLE 13 (Continued)
    GLADES COUNTY OFF SEASON POPULATION ESTIMATE FOR 1991
    (Based on Projected Housing Units of 4,414)

    Residential      Mobile Home/        Multi-Family
    Single-Family Recreational Vehicle Apartment Condo

    1,352	420	153	N/P*

    507	220	N/P	N/P

    ek    268	116	-N/P	N/P
    Hotel-
    Motel

    425

    N/P

    N/P
    Zone

    -Moore Haven

    Ortona

    Fisheating Cree

    : Lakeport/
    Buckhead Ridge

    TOTALS

    Zone

    Moore Haven

    Ortona

    Fisheating Cree

    Lakeport/
    Buckhead Ridge

    TOTALS
    Total

    2,350

    727

    384
    2,933

    5,060
    812

    1,568
    56
    N/P
    80	3,881

    505	7,341
    209
    N/P
    TABLE 14
    GLADES COUNTY PEAK SEASON VEHICLE ESTIMATE FOR 1991
    (Based on Projected Housing Units of 4,414)

    Residential      Mobile Home/	Multi-Family
    	Hot
    Single-Family Recreational Vehicle	Apartment	Condo
    	Mot

    572	362	68	-N/P*	1

    215	189	N/P	N/P	N,

    ek   113	100	N/P	N/P	N,
    tel-
    tel

    23

    /P

    /P
    Total

    1,125

    404

    213
    1,241

    2,141
    700

    1,351
    25

    93

    N/P

    N/P
    23	1,989

    1.46	3,731
    GLADES COUNTY OFF SEASON VEHICLE ESTIMATE FOR 1991
    (Based on Projected Housing Units of 4,414)

    lResidential     Mobile Home/	Multi-Family	HI
    Single-Family Recreational. Vehicle	Apartment	Condo	M

    572	178	65	N/P*	I

    215	93	N/P	N/P

    ek    113	50	N/P	N/P
    otel-
    otel

    180

    N/P.

    N/P
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    Zone

    Moore Raven

    Ortona

    Visheating Cree

    : Lakeport/
    .Buckhead Ridge

    TOTALS

    '* No Projecti
    Total

    955

    308

    163

    1,241

    2,141

    ion
    N/P	34	1,643

    N/P	214	3,109
    * --w~-0 " *      4    .5 *..;4   .. :.J
    344

    665

    ' ~      .  ...         .f
    24

    89
    :                 , .         .. ..
    I
    II-F-17

    The facilities expected to come on line can be categorized as new
    routes  and improvements to existing routes,  and	enlarging	and
    improving  existing  school  facilities (shelters	are  often	in
    public schools).

    Glades County has no evacuation route improvements that will be
    in  place by 1991,  although engineering studies and right of way
    purchases will be underway in several areas.

    Likewise, the only school planned for modernization and expansion
    is	Moore Hlaven Junior/Senior High School,  but this facility	is
    not	currently  in  use as  a  shelter.  . After  renovations	are
    complete, the school will be re-evaluated for use as a shelter.

    Assuming there will not be significant improvements in place, new            !
    shelter satisfaction rates (Table 5), times to clear (Table 9),
    county exiting times (Table 10) and clearance time totals  (Table
    11)  will  need  to be  calculated.   The  evacuating  population
    (mobile homes) will grow by about 100 people and the number of
    evacuating	vehicles by about 73.   Granted,  these  numbers	are
    small,  but	with  the  limited facilities that are and  will	be
    available, there will be an impact.

    Total  new shelter satisfaction is given in Table 15 and the  new
    I
    total clearance time is given in Table 16.

    TABLE 15
    IN-COUNTY SHELTER SATISFACTION, 1991                          3

    PUBLIC      HOTEL/MOTEL	STAY W/
    EVACUEES  SHELTER SPACE/%	SPACE/%	FRIENDS/%
    CATEGORY	JULY/NOV.	JULY/NOV.	JULY/NOV.	JULY/NOV.

    All	1,568(J)	3,340(J)	+ not needed(J) + not needed(J)
    3,193(N)	3,340(N)	+ not needed(N)   not needed(N)
    100%(J)
    100%(N)

    = 100% shelter met in County for July
    = 1.00% shelter met in County for November

    Since	all necessary shelter is available within the	County,  it            e
    must	again  be  assumed that there will  be  people	voluntarily
    leaving the County and the number of evacuating vehicles could be
    as high as 30% of all vehicles in the County.

    TABLE 16
    TOTAL EVACUATION TIME

    TOTAL EVACUATION
    CLEARANCE TIME       TIME
    CATEGORY  DESTINATION  WEATHER	JULY  NOVEMBER	JULY  NOVEMBER

     All        1.1     :     8	1.4     2.9	-10.5    12.0 .

    I I--F-18

    PART III- REGIONAL SUMMARY

    The  summary	will discuss two aspects of a hurricane  evacuation
    *.    that   have	been  discussed  before.    These  are  inter-county
    background traffic, and the guessing effect, if any, that may
    occur from one county's evacuees moving into another county.

    Background Trafficg Present and 1991

    Since	hurricanes are slow-moving phenomena,  it may be  expected
    ! that,	at least in the initial phases, there will be some traffic
    moving as usual. Within each county, this has been accounted for
    on	critical road links as the "slow" response,  or a 50/50 split
    *    in	traffic  movement.   Greater concern for the storm  (or  more
    imperative evacuation orders) will in later stages reduce the
    I    split to 70/30 or 90/10.

    Some normal movement between counties, however, must be expected.
    This reflects normal business activities, work trips, and the
    movement  of  goods.   A  "worst" case scenario  would  have  the
    background trips experienced on a normal day be the background
    trips	for  a hurricane evacuation.   That being  the  case,  the
    region	experiences an estimated 70,055 trips entering the region
    (with an equal number departing).

    This  varies  from	county to county,  with	Sarasota  being  the
    biggest  recipient	of  inter-regional and	inter-county  travel.
    Table III-1 depicts this travel for current years and for 1991.

    TABLE III-1
    INTER-COUNTY TRAVEL
    |                       E~~~~~~~NTER-COUNTY TRAVEL-
    TOTAL COUNT
    1987*	1991**

    10,260	11,659
    38,129	45,062
    30,558	36,114
    33,336	39,396
    1,257	1,486
    15,532	18,356
    15,692	18,545
    3,191	3,771
    19,580	23,150
    COUINTY

    Sarasota
    ROUTE LOCATION
    NOTE***

    To/From Manatee
    To/From Manatee
    To/From Manatee
    To/From Manatee
    To/From DeSoto
    To/From Charlotte
    To/From Charlotte
    To/From Charlotte
    To/From Charlotte
    i SR 789
    US 41
    US 301
    1-75
    SR 72
    1-75
    US 41
    Pine Street
    SR 775
    N
    N
    N
    N
    E
    S
    S
    S
    S
    Charlotte   1-75
    US 41
    Pine Street
    SR 775
    SR 31
    15,532
    15,692
    3,191
    19,588
    2,089
    18,356
    18,545
    3,771
    23,150
    2,469
    N
    N
    N
    N
    N
    To/From Sarasota
    To/From Sarasota
    To/From Sarasota
    To/From Sarasota
    To/From DeSoto
    -* Projected from 1986 counts by a 5X i%ncrease.
    I     ** Projected from 1986 counts by a 25% increase.
    I *t* Normally a 50% split in each direction.
    N/C No Counts
    TTT-1

    I
    TABLE IZ111 (Continued)
    INTER-COUNTY TRAVEL
    TOTAL COUNT
    1987*      1991**
    COUNTY
    ROUTE LOCATION
    NOTE**t
    I
    US 17
    SR 39
    Kings Hwy.
    SR 74
    Burnt Store
    US 41
    1-75
    SR 31
    N
    N
    N
    E
    S
    S
    S
    S
    3,484
    N/C
    N/C
    N/C
    N/C
    15,223
    15,529
    2,001
    4,117
    N/C
    N/C
    'N/C
    N/C
    18,124
    18,352
    2,365
    To/From
    To/From
    To/From
    To/From
    To/From
    To/From
    To/From
    To/From
    DeSoto
    Sarasota
    DeSoto
    Glades Co.
    Lee County
    Lee County
    Lee County
    Lee County
    I
    I
    I
    18,124
    18,352
    2,365
    N/C
    9,506
    3,810
    20,931
    16,877
    Lee
    US 41
    1-75
    SR 31
    Burnt Store
    SR 80
    SR 82
    US 41
    1-75
    N
    N
    N
    N
    E
    E
    S
    S
    15,223
    15,529
    2,001
    N/C
    7,685
    3,224
    17,582
    14,177
    To/From
    To/From
    To/From
    To/From
    To/From
    To/From
    To/From
    To/From
    Charlotte
    Charlotte
    Charlotte
    Charlotte
    Hendry
    Rendry
    Collier
    Collier
    I
    Collier
    C 865
    US 41
    1-75
    SR 82
    SR 84
    US 41
    SR 29
    3,864
    17,582
    14,177
    3,224
    5,255
    3,229
    2,999
    N
    N
    N
    N
    E
    E
    N
    4,567
    20,931
    16,877
    3,810
    6,210
    3,816
    3,544
    To/From
    To/From
    To/From
    To/From
    To/From
    To/From
    To/From
    Lee
    Lee
    Lee
    Lee
    Broward
    Dade
    Hendry
    I
    I
    Ifendry

    Glades
    SR 29
    US 27
    SR 80
    SR 78
    SR 29
    US 27

    SR 78
    US 27
    SR 74
    US 27
    SR 29
    S
    S/E
    W
    W
    N
    N

    N
    N
    W
    S
    S
    2,999
    13,966
    7,685
    N/C
    1.2,223
    9,211

    3,384
    9,176
    N/C
    9,211
    12,223
    3,544
    16,505
    9,506
    N/C
    14,446
    10, 886

    3,999
    10,843
    N/C
    10,886
    14,446
    To/From
    To/From
    To/From
    To/From
    To/From
    To/From

    To/From
    To/From
    To/From
    To/From
    To/From
    Collier
    Palm Beac4
    Lee
    Lee
    Glades
    Glades

    Okeechobee
    Highlands
    Charlotte
    Hendry
    Hendry
    I
    * Projected from 1986 counts by a 5% increase.
    ** Projected from
    *** Normally a 50%
    N/C No counts.
    1986 counts by a 25% increase.
    split in each direction.
    Using	this information,  it is possible t.o hypothicate -the  "in-,
    out"	and "through" traffic the' region may experience.   This  is
    possible through summarizing the traffic entering by direction
    and comparing the differences.  Once compared, the "low" point in

    traffic counts can be considered "through trip equivalents" and
    the  remainder represent destination satisfaction.   Table  111-2
    presents this estimate for the Region as a whole.
    TABLE 111-2
    TRIP DESTINATION
    TRIPS*
    GENERATED OR
    TERMINATED        THROUGH
    1987    1991.   1.987    1991
    TOTAL TRIPS
    1987    1991
    COUNTY DIRECTION
    132,231
    1,486
    63,882
    Sarasota
    N
    E
    S
    112,281
    1,257
    53,995
    29-,772 -34,948

    70,408	-	-
    N/C	-	-
    38,841	-	-
    TOTAL

    Charlotte
    26,997 31,912
    N
    W
    S
    59,576
    N/C
    32,753
    TOTAL
    --   13,411  15,783   16,376  19,420

    38,841                      -        -
    13,316	-
    37,808	-         -       -        -

    --    5,952   7,175   15,880  18,904
    Lee
    N
    E
    S
    32,753
    10, 909
    31,759
    TOTAL

    Collier
    N
    W
    E
    38,622
    3,224
    8,482
    45,919
    3,810
    10,026
    TOTAL
    --   16,681  19, 852
    4,242	5,013

    6,983	8,253'
    Hendry
    N
    W
    E
    S
    21.,434
    7,685
    13,966
    2,999
    25,332
    9,506
    16,505
    3,544
    TOTALT

    Glades
    --    9,706  10,939
    12,560
    N/C
    21,434
    14,842	-        -
    N/C	-
    25,332	-        -

    --    4,437   4,745
    N
    W
    S
    TOTAL
    6,280
    7,421
    *    Taking  only 50% of trips,  to be presumed as	entering  one
    side  and  exiting the other;  or matched by	an  equivalent
    number of out trips.
    N/C  No Counts

    This distribution is visually depicted in--Map III-i.

    �::'~~~i-    '.    .         .: .::~ -.  -'  ,,     . ...........................-......................... . --  ., ..  ... ;.:
    III-3

    102023
    120572

    1257
    1486

    SARASOTA
    34-87	20eg              A       176
    15532	~~~~24-69117
    1.5r,92	55 32Ci    447                                10843
    18545	1.5

    26921i
    CHARLOTTE                          GLADES	fAft               I

    22,239211'
    '14446       t�-   1~~~~~~~39szi0

    9506

    Qr   LEE       I 7381oS85   2999	HENDRY

    r'-	I~~~~
    3562. 3

    --.---�------------

    15223	1987  F'IP VLUMES
    18124	1991 TRIP VLUMES
    5255
    COLLIER
    o
    I

    0   4   8          16 (ILES                                                    3229

    MAP   Ill-                                              ... ..:...
    INTERCOUNTY TRAVEL, 1987, 1991
    C\
    c_

    I�

    Inter-county Loadings
    As stated previously,  a hurricane is a regional phenomenon.   It
    is  unlikely that an evacuation order will be needed for only one
    county, or, for that matter, only one region. Evacuees going to
    other parts of the State or out-of-state will pass through other
     counties undergoing or preparing to undergo an evacuation.   This
    situation   was  initially  discussed  in  the  1981-82  Regional
    Hurricane Evacuation Plan for a worse case scenario. The purpose
     of this section is to provide a greater variety of possible
    incidents, so that local and state Emergency Management Officials
    can  use  the information for a better  understanding  of  inter-
    county impacts.

    The	basic information used in this analysis will be the	routes,
    the	route capacities,  and the total vehicle loadings,	and  the
     time	it takes to exit the separate counties.   This will be then
    modified for "in county" congestion points for critical  roadways
    (commonly 1-75, US 41, US 27, SR 29, among others) which will be
     used  in  multi-county  evacuations.   The  usual  direction	for
    5   :evacuation  is northerly,  although easterly routes will also	be
    examined.

    Overall,  the  greater  the hurricane,  the greater the  regional
    evacuation  need.   Similarly,  the more counties  affected,  the
    greater the evacuation need. This is depicted in Table 111-3, as
     total  vehicle  estimates.   Also  provided	is  an  estimate	of
    "background"  loadings,  which remains the	same,  regardless	of
    storm category.

    |3~~~~ ~~TABLE 111-3
    MULTI-COUNTY VEHICLE LOADINGS (JULYI

    E      STORM                              COUIJNTY
    CATEGORY	COLLIER    LEE   CHARLOTTE  SARASOTA   HENDRY  GLADES

    1	26,729	48,750	16,931	17,311	622	351

    2	39,066	86,743	25,387	23,130	622	38f

    I    ~3	58,]92	109,155	37,529	35,335	622	381

    (NOVEMBER)

    1	34,721	64,672	19,520	25,959	1,084	664

    |    ~2	47,556	111,549	26,852	31,780	1,084	664
    I
    3      68,072  127,218    39,730       46,470      1,084      664

     Background
     All Cate-  4,242   15,880    16,376         26,997      6,983   6,280
    gories

    |I                                                                ~~i ,..j!, j.~~i:  ,.-.

    1                                    111-5
    !

    These  loadings indicate that there should be as  few  artificial
    restrictions on inter-county roadways as possible.   For example,
    US  41 is an important inter-county roadways,	yet it is also for
    each  coastal  county a locally important road	for  movement	of
    evacuees  within  the county.   Consequently, it is necessary	to
    analyze specific inter-county routes and combination of routes to
    determine where congestion may occur, and if it will occur due to
    either reductions in design capacity or to overload by internal
    traffic.   Map III-2 depicts the critical inter-county routes and
    their capacities for 1987 (slow response) only.                              I

    These	capacities enable assessments to be made regarding  inter-
    county	loadings.	This will be expressed in compact  hours	for
    simplicity  sake.	Behavior in actual loading wil]  differ,	but
    will not affect overall times. (For example, 1-75 may be able to
    take 2,000 cars per hour;  Collier County may actually only	load
    1,000  cars  per  hour,  with  Lee  County  then  making  up	the
    difference).    Using  this  approach,   the  roadway  capacities
    "exiting" each county (depicted in Map III-2 as one-way volumes)
    combined  with the vehicle loads in Table III-3 give traffic hour
    equivalents.  These are depicted in Table III-4 for all routes.

    TABLE III-4
    SINGLE-COUNTY LOADING TIMES

    (JULY)

    STORM CATEGORY
    COUNTY             1              2             3

    Collier       (4.5) 3.3       (6.6) 4.8    (9.8) 7.1
    Lee	7.5	13.7	17.2
    Charlotte	2.6	3.9	5.7
    Sarasota	3.2	4.2	4.9
    Hendry	0.4	0.4	0.4
    G]ades	0.2	0.2	0.2

    (NOVEMBER)

    Collier       (5.9) 4.2       (8.0) 5.8   (11.5) 8.3
    Lee	9.8	17.2	19.6
    Charlotte	3.0	4.1	6.0
    Sarasota	4.7	5.8	6.5
    Hendry	0.7	0.7	0.7
    Glades	0.3	0.3	0.3

    NOTE:  Co]lier (US 41N,E; 1-75 N; SR 84 E; SR 29 N)
    Lee (US 41 N; 1-75 N; SR 31 N; SR 80 E)
    Charlotte (SR 775 N; Pine N; US 41 W; 1-75 N; US 17 N;
    SR 74 E)
    Sarasota (1-75; US 41; US 301 for Category 3)
    Hiendry (US 27 N & E; SR 29 N)
    Glades (US 27; SR 78)
    ( ) reflects roads not used due to a crossing storm.

    :~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~' "  * : ': .. .'   .' '  " " '- :  :'"  ."' %.............?.?. .... :.-
    ,......,:.;.... "''e  ..... '  '-:'5..:,','4.'.:.; :.' ;, ',   :.

    III-6
    !

    CRITICAL REGIONAL LINKS
    ------ CRITICAL INTERCOUNTY LINKS
    I
    I
    I
    i:

    I :
    II
    I
    I

    MAP 111-2
    ROUTE LO-ADINGS

    III-7

    Crossing hurricanes from the east, however, negates counties'
    abilities to move traffic easterly. It may also affect County
    abilities to move traffic north, should the storm be crossing
    above  some affected communities.   An attempt to assess this  is
    made through eliminating US 41 (E), 1-75/SR 84 (E), and US 27 (E)
    as  routes.   Table III-4 reflects the changes this would have by
    the numbers in parenthesis.

    As can be seen in the individual county tables, with all routes
    open,  single  county loading times are  not  excessive.   Multi-
    county loading times, however, will climb. This is depicted in
    Table  III-5,   for  different  scenari'os,.,, with  all   counties
    evacuating according to the same category storm.

    TABLE 11I-5
    MULTI-COUNTY LOADING TIMES
    I
    I
    I

    3                1
    COUNTY
    COMBINATION
    STORM CATEGORY
    2
    1
    I
    (27.0)
    (31.2)
    (27.6)
    (32.2)
    (32.7)
    (36.1)

    (33.3)
    (37.1)
    (37.6)
    (43.6)
    C/L

    C/L/G/H

    C/L/CH

    C/L/CH/
    G/H/

    C/L/CH/S

    C/L/CH/
    S/G/HR

    L/CH/S

    L./CH/S/G/H

    CH/S

    CH/S/C/H
    (J)
    (N)
    (J)
    (N)
    (J)
    (N)

    (J)
    (N)
    (J)
    (N)

    (J)
    (N)
    (J)
    (N)
    (J)
    (N)
    (J)
    (N)
    (J)
    (N)
    10.8
    14.0
    11.4
    15.0
    12.4
    17.0

    13.0
    18.0
    16.2
    22.7
    (12.0)
    (15.7)
    (12.6)
    (16.7)
    (13.6)
    (18.7)

    (14.2)
    (19.7)
    (17.4)
    (24.3)
    (J)
    (N)
    (3)
    (N)
    (J)
    (N)

    (J)
    (N)
    (J)
    (N)

    (J)
    (N)
    (J)
    (N)
    (J)
    (N)
    (J)
    (N)
    (J)
    (N)
    18.5 (19.3)
    23.0 (25.2)
    19.1 (19.9)
    24.0 (26.2)
    22.4 (24.2)
    27.1 (29.3)

    23.0 (24.8)
    28.1 (30.3)
    26.6 (28.4)
    32.9 (35.1)

    27.2 (29.0)
    33.9 (36.1)
    21.8
    27.1
    22.6
    28.1
    8.1
    9.9
    8.7
    10.9
    (J)
    (N)
    (J)
    (N)
    (J)
    (N)

    (J)
    (N)
    (J)
    (N)

    (J)
    (N)
    (J)
    (N)
    (J)
    (N)
    (J)
    (N)
    (J)
    (N)
    24.3
    27.9
    24.9
    28.9
    30.0
    33.9

    30.6
    34.9
    34.9
    40.4
    I
    I
    I
    16.8 (18.0)
    23.7 (25.3)
    13.5
    19.5
    14.1
    20.5
    5.8
    7.7
    6.4
    8.7
    35.5 (38.2)
    41.4 (44.6)
    27.8
    32.1   -  -
    28.4
    33.1
    10.6
    12.5
    12.2
    13.5
    I
    I
    I
    As the table demonstrates, a
    even crossing and closing
    worse case Category
    1 storm in July,
    I
    I
    easterly routes, is likely
    to  be
    accommodated   with  a  maximum  18.0  hour  inter-county   time.
     However, a November Category 3 storm has extremely high times for
    evacuation,  41.4 hours,  with a crossing 3 storm - very unlikely
    condition  - requiring 44.6 hours.   The appropriate storm  surge
    tables  demonstrate that a Category 4 or 5 storm winds are needed
    to create Category 3 storm flooding; consequently, it may be
    assumed  that landfalling or paralleling time (44.4 ho'urs) is the
    worse  case  scenario.  Regretfully,  ,this time  also  cannot  be
    accommodated by any foreseeable Community or state'action.
    I

    i
    I
    III-8

    I What is useful to note is that neither Glades nor Hendry Counties
    provide traffic bottleneck for evacuation.   In both cases, there
    is the capacity to move more traffic out of the county than there
    is traffic entering the county.  Consequently, other than traffic
    I      control  at the intersection of SR 80 and 29,  no other action is
    needed.

     This is not the case for the coastal counties of Lee and
    Charlotte.	Both  counties	are  generating traffic to	such	an
    extent  that	intra-regional	travel  times  on  US  41	will	be
    increased.
    *
    One  factor	that  is	difficult  to  assess  is  the  impact	of
    background	traffic.	Given  that  a hurricane is  known  to	be
    approaching,	it   is	likely  that  normal	intercounty	and
    interregional	traffic	will  not occur.	It	must  be	assumed,
    however,   that   there   will   be  some	background	traffic.
    Consequently, the "through" trip depicted in Table III-2 probably
    *  constitute  the  worse case conditions.   Contrary to  evacuation
    traffic, however, this travel is not compressible into a single
    *	loading  number  expressed  in  hours.    Instead,   it  must  be
    3	considered  a  factor absorbing a portion of the  loading  times.
    Therefore, if the through trips is assumed to be distributed
    through a twelve hour travel day, a factor can be calculated as a
    percentage of road capacity for twelve hours that can be used  to
    factor  up  the  evacuation  stream.   For  example,  if  roadway
    capacity for several county roads was 5,000 trips per hour, the
     twelve hour capacity is 60,000 trips.   If background traffic was
    6,000	trips per day,  only 54,000 trips remain  for  evacuation.
    This	expressed as a factor of 1.1.	Table III-6 represents	the
     multi-county	loading  times  from	Table  III-5,   factored	to
    represent  the	background  traffic from  Table  III-2,  and	the
    roadway capacities from Map III-2.
    TABLE III-6
    MULTI-COUNTY LOADING TIMES
    WITH BACKGROUND TRAFFIC
    COUNTY
    COMBINATION
    BACKGROUND
    FACTOR
    CATEGORY
    2
    I
    3
    C/L

    C/L/G/HI

    C/L/CII

    C/L/C1{/G/H

    C/L/C1{/S

    C/L/CHI/S/G/H
    1.25    (J) 13.5 (15.0)
    (N) 17.5 (19.6)
    (J) 14.3 (15.8)
    (N) 18.8 (20.9)
    1.25    (J) 15.5 (17.0)
    (N) 21.3 (23.4)
    (J) 16.3 (17.8)
    (N) 22.5 (24.6)
    1.3     (J) 21.1 (22.6)
    (N) 29.5 (31.6)
    (J) 21.8 (23.4)
    :  (N) 30.8 (32.9)
    (J)
    (N)
    (J)
    (N)
    (J)
    (N)
    (J)
    (N)
    (J)
    (N)
    (J)
    (N)
    23.1 (24.1)	(J) 30.4 (33.8)
    28.8 (31.5)	(N) 34.9 (39.0)
    23.9 (24.9)	(J) 31.1 (34.5)
    30.0 (32.8)	(N) 36.1 (40.3)
    28.0 (30.2)	(J) 37.5 (40.9)
    33.9 (36.6)	(N) 42.4 (45.1)
    28.8 (31.0)	(J) 38.2 (41.6)
    35.1 (37.9)	(N) 43.6 (46.4)
    34.6 (36.9)	(J) 45.4 (48.9)
    42.8 (45.6)	(N) 52.5 (56.7)
    35.4 (37.7)	(J) 46.2..(49.7)
    44.1 (4.6.9)- (N) 53.8{58.0)
    ITI-9

    TABLE III-6 (Continuedl
    MULTI-COUNTY LOADING TIMES
    WITH BACKGROUND TRAFFIC

    COUNTY        BACKGROUND
    COMBINATION    FACTOR                           CATEGORY
    1                 2	3

    L/CH/S        1.3    (J)	17.6	(J)	28.3	(J)	36.1
    (N)	25.4	-(N)	35.2	(N)	41.7
    L/CIa/S/G/H            (J)	18.3	(J)	29.4	(J)	36.9
    (N)	26.7	(N)..	36.5	(N)	43.0
    CH/S         1.3    (J)	7.5	(J)	10.5	(J)	13.8
    (N)	10.0	(N)	12.5	(N)	16.3
    C1I/S/G/H             (J)	8.3	(J)	11.3	(J)	15.9
    (N)	11.3	(N)	14.2	(N)	17.6
    U
    As  the table demonstrates,  background traffic can even  further
    hinder  the success of a multi-county evacuation.   A category  3
    time of 53.8 hours cannot be expected to be a success,  but  this              3
    is suspected without background traffic; what was not expected is
    that a Category I landfalling six-county scenario has a 30.8 hour
    time  for November;  this time is also too lengthy to expect that
    an evacuation will be successful.  Yet, without more local public
    and private shelters,  this time is needed.   Consequently,  more
    work  is needed to keep as many evacuees in their home county  as
    is possible.

    Chapter IV (Critiques and Elaborations) provides alternatives
    that can reduce these times.  These include more public shelters,
    more  staged	evacuations  (tropical  storm  or	barrier   island
    scenarios),	and  more  on-site  preparedness	activities.    In
    addition   to	these  activities,   the  Council  will  undertake              3
    community-specific assessments from local (or state) requests  to.
    determine  other  activities  to reduce  inter-county  evacuatiin -
    times and to improve local preparedness.
    I
    !
    I

    I

    I

    III-10
    |

    3    PART IV.  CRITIQUE AND ELABORATIONS

    This section examines alternatives to certain approaches taken in
    Parts	II  (Counties) and III (Regional Summary) and the	impacts
    these	alternatives  would  have.   This  section  also	provides
    assumptions on critical actions that local and other governmental
    U  i agencies should undertake to improve evacuation times.

    Behavior - Destinations Change

    |    Part  I  summarizes  other area's  behavioral  studies  regarding
    destination desires i.e., public shelter, friend-relative, hotel,
    and  out-of-county.	Part II,	however,. based  the	destination
    desires   on	local	capacities	to  provide  public	or  private
    sheltering.	This section assesses the regional impacts that are
    mitigated should each County satisfy the sheltering needs of 66%
    I	of  its evacuating population.   This would include sheltering by
    m*	public shelters, private shelters, friends, relatives, and rental
    shelter outside of the hurricane flood zone.

    I 0 Should each coastal county keep within its 66% of  evacuees,	the
    major   impact  will  be  a  reduction  of  vehicle  loading	on
    interregional roadways, and thus a reduction of loadings in
    counties having evacuees pass through to other destinations.  The
    I
    reduction in out-of-county vehicle loadings is depicted in  Table
    IV-l,

    m TABLE IV-1
    REVISED LOADINGS.  34% Evacuees Leaving County

    |         COUNTY   CATEGORY   ORIGINAL LOADINGS	REVISED LOADINGS
    JULY     NOVEMBER	JULY	NOVEMBER

    |    ~Collier       1	26,729	34,721	12,466	15,292
    *9~~ ~2	39,066	47,550	15,535	18,330
    3	58,192	68,072	21,116	24,701

    |        Lee          1	48,750	64,672	28,927	34,303
    2	86,743	111,549	37,618	46,650
    3	109,1.55	127,218	41,054	47,272
    U
    Charlotte   1	16,931	19,520	8,579	9,342
    2	25,387	26,852	10,203	10,703
    3	37,529	39,730	13,361	14,086

    Sarasota	1	17,311	25,959	11,678	15,061
    !5~ ~	2	23,130	31,780	13,773	17,372
    I	3	35,335	46,470	18,039	21,913

    This  reduction  has a positive impact on intercounty	evacuation
    E     times.    This is depicted in Table IV-2,  which is a revision	of
    Table III-4,  to reflect reduced single-county loading times.	It
    is; also depicted in Table IV.-3, Which' is"a revision of Table III-'
    5, which reflects reduced multi-county traffic loading times.

    3:~~~~~~~I V-1

    TABLE IV-2
    REVISED SINGLE-COUNTY LOADING TIMES
    STORM CATEGORY
    2
    COUNTY
    1
    3
    Collier
    (J)	1.5 (2.1)
    (N)	1.9 (2.6)
    (J)	1.9 (2. 6)
    (N)	2.2 (3.1)
    (J)	2. 6 (3.6)
    (N)	3.0  (4.2)
    Lee (Quick)

    Charlotte

    Sarasota
    (J)
    (N)

    (J)
    (N)

    (J)
    (N)
    (J)	5.8
    (N)	7.2
    (J)
    (N)

    (J)
    (N)
    4.5
    5.2

    1.3
    1.4

    2.1
    2.8
    7. 3
    7.3
    (J)
    (N)
    1.6
    1.6
    2.0
    2.1
    I
    (J)	2.5
    (N)	3.2
    (J)
    (N)
    3.3
    4.0
    I
    Hendry

    Glades
    (J)
    (N)
    0.4
    0.7
    (J)	0.4
    (N)	0.7
    (J)
    (N)
    0.4
    0.7
    I
    (J)	0.2
    (N)	0. 3
    (J)	0. 2
    (N)	0.3
    (J)
    (N)
    0.2
    0. 3
    I
    Parenthesis
    denotes the time if
    eastern  or   southern
    "tcrossing" storm.
    evacuation routes are closed due to a
    I
    TABLE IV-3
    REVISED MULTI-COUNTY LOADING TIMES
    I
    COUNTY
    COMBINATION
    STORM CATEGORY
    2
    1
    3
    I
    C/L          (J)
    (N)
    C/L/G/H        (J)
    (N)
    C/L/CU         (J)
    (N)
    C/L/CII/G/H (3)
    (N)
    C/L/CI/S       (J)
    (N)
    C/L/CI{/S/	(J)
    G/H	(N)
    L/CII/S	(J)
    (N)
    L/CII/S/G/I1 (J)
    (N)
    CII/S          (J)
    (N)
    C.I/S/c/I.     (J)
    (N)
    6.0
    7.1
    6.6
    8. 1
    7.3
    8.5
    7.9
    9.5
    9.4
    11.3
    10.0
    12.3
    ( 6.6)
    ( 7.9)
    ( 7.2)
    ( 8.9)
    ( 7.9)
    ( 9.3)
    ( 8.5)
    (10.3)
    (10.0)
    (12.1)
    (10.6)
    (13.1)
    7.7
    9.4
    8.3
    10.4
    9.3
    11.0
    9.9
    12.0
    11.8
    14.2
    12.4
    15. 2
    ( 8.3)
    (10.3)
    ( 8.9)
    (11.3)
    ( 9-9)
    (11.9)
    (10.5)
    (1]2.9)
    (12.4)
    (15.1)
    (13.0)
    (16.1)
    8.9	( 9.9)
    10.3	(11.5)
    9.5	(10.5)
    11.3	(12.5)
    11.9	(12.9)
    12.4	(13.6)
    12.5	(13.5)
    13.4	(14.6)
    15.2	(16.2)
    16.4	(17.6)
    15.8	(16.8)
    17.4	(18.6)
    11.6
    13.4
    12.2
    14.4
    5.3
    6.1
    . 5.9 ._
     7.2
    I
    I
    I
    I
    7.9
    9-4
    8.5
    10.4
    3.4
    4.2
    4.0
    :    5.2
    9.9
    12.0
    10.5
    13.0
    4.1
    4.8
    4.7
      5. 8 -
    I
    I
    I
    IV-2

    The positive benefit the reduction in loadings has is that multi-
    county  evacuation  becomes  feasible.   This  is  true  even  if
    background factors are considered, increasing time by 30%.

    It should be noted that background factors can be reduced through
    a public policy limiting "casual" traffic entering counties
    ordered  to  undergo an evacuation.   An example of  this  policy
    would be that, if Lee and Collier Counties had to evacuate, Miami
    to  Tampa traffic (and vice versa) would be blocked from using I--
    75 in Dade and Charlotte Counties and routed towards US 27 (or I-
    3    ~4/I-95).                                            '

    Behavior - Response Times

    3      The biggest contribution to the speed in which residents make the
    decision to evacuate is the urgency imparted by those giving the
    order	the public hears or sees.   An order  informing	residents
    that	they  have  to evacuate and informing them that	they	have
    m several  hour to do so has less urgency than an order that	tells
    them to leave immediately for their safety.  The County estimates
    in Part II assume a less urgent order and a set of circumstances
    that has the last of the evacuees starting their evacuation seven
    hours  after the evacuation order is issued.   This provides time
    for people to return home, purchase materials, load up goods,
    make destination arrangements, household arrangements and g�.

    This section assumes the impact of an urgent or "quick" order.
    This presupposes a set of circumstances that has all affected
    m persons warned at approximately the same time, access to the area
    being severely restricted, and the warning imparting information
    that the storms effects are imminent.	For this type of order, a
    response  time of two hours is assumed,	reflecting time to dress
    appropriately, gather supplies, and go. It does not provide time
    for purchasing goods, doing much "about the house" preparations,
    or  taking the household pet to the veterinarian.   Using the  2-
    hour estimate,  few zones regionwide have intermittent evacuation
    streams, providing room for other zones to enter the traffic
    flow.   Overing	effects will be much greater than for the  seven
    hour estimate.	TTable IV-3 depicts the changes in effected zones
    regionwide.   There is no impact in reducing evacuating times for
    any coastal, county responding to a category 2 or 3 storm. Inland
    3     Counties, however, have reduced times.
    !

    U
    .7-           >2�..~~~~i~~..
    IV-3

    I
    I
    TABLE IV-4
    DECISION TIMES {Quickj_ Seven and
    -----~  _ _ - _      __
    Two Hours

    Response          I
    November
    Based on
    "Seven-hour" Response
    June     November
    "Two-gour"
    June
    County
    Zone
    I
    Collier
    Everglades
    Goodland
    S. Naples
    Naples Beach
    East Naples
    Fakahatchee
    North Naples
    Golden Gate
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    2.0
    2.0
    5.0
    5.7
    2.6
    2.0
    5.2
    2.0

    4.8
    3.3
    2.0
    3.5
    4.4
    5.6
    2.0
    2.6
    2.0
    2.0
    2.0
    2.0
    2.2
    2.0
    2.0
    2.0
    2.0
    3.3
    2.0
    2.0
    5.9
    6.2
    3.0
    2.0
    5.8
    2.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    �1-
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    I
    I
    I
    Lee
    Pine Island
    N.Ft.Myers/River
    North River
    N.E.River/Alva
    Iona
    Bonita Beach
    Old Ft. Myers
    Bonita Springs
    San Carlos Park
    Central Ft. Myers
    W.S. Ft. Myers
    Summerlin
    Tice
    Orange River
    E.S. Ft. Myers
    Page Field
    Six Mile Cypress
    N.Ft. Myers

    Charlotte
    5.4
    3.4
    2.0
    4.1
    5.1
    6.8
    2.0
    3.2
    2.0
    2.1
    2.0
    2.0
    2.4
    2.0
    2.0
    2.0
    2.0
    5.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7. 0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    Myakka River
    Barrier Islands
    Cape Haze
    Port Charlotte
    Peace River
    Punta Corda
    South County
    Cape Haze (2)
    Port Charlotte(2)
    Shell Creek
    Punta Gorda(2)
    South County(2)
    Cape Ha7ze(3)
    Shell Creek(3)
    Punta 'Gorda(3):
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7. 0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    7.0
    * 7.0
    2.0
    5.8
    2.0
    4. 3
    3.9
    2.7
    2.0
    2.6
    3.7
    2.0
    2.0
    2.0
    2.0
    2.0
    2.0.
    2.0
    6.2
    2.0
    4.4
    4.1
    3.1
    2.0
    3.1
    3.9
    2.0
    2.0
    2.0
    2.0
    2.0
    2. 0
    I
    IV-4

    TABLE IV-4 (Continued)
    DECISION TIMES (Quickl  Seven and Two Hours

    Based on
    I    County    Zone      "Seven-hour" Response	"Two-Hour" Response
    June     November	June       November

     Sarasota

    Longboat Key	7.0	7.0 -	5.5	6.5
    Siesta Key	7.0	7.0	5.7	6.7
    I           Casey Key	7.0	7.0	2.0	2.0
    Manasota Key	7.0	7.0	2.0	2.0
    Myakka Floodplain	7.0	7.0	2.0	2.0
    i      Englewood Bayfront	7.0	7.0	2.7	2.0
    Venice/Osprey	7.0	7.0	2.0	2.0
    Sarasota Bayfront	7.0	7.0	3.3	3.7
    Myakka (2)	7.0	7.0	2.0	2.0
    I
    Inland (2)	7.0	7.0	4.2	6.0
    South Myakka	7.0	7.0	2.0	2.0
    North Port	7.0	7.0	3.1	3.4
    |    ~Inland (3)	7.0	7.0	2.6	3.1

    Hendry	All Zones	7.0	7.0	2.0	2.0

    Glades	All Zones	7.0	7.0	2.0	2.0

    f     It  should be noted that,  unless the intercounty  loading  times
    decline	to  those  levels indicated in  Table  IV-3,	behavioral
    response	time reductions have no real positive impact	beyond  a
    I     movement to public or private shelters in the local community.

    Shelters and Shelter Space

    The  County  evacuation  scenarios  are  based  on  the  use   of
    identified public shelters, providing 20 square feet per evacuee.
     Assuming	that  satisfying	the sheltering needs of  66%  of  the
    County's	evacuees  through	either public or  private  resources
    remains a goal, each County has two options, increasing shelter
    space  or reducing the square foot allocation for  each  evacuee.
    I     (A third combination combining both is also possible.)

    Each County has the capacity for increasing shelter space through
    the  further designation as she]ter or refuges certain additional
    public  and  private  buildings.    Further,  private  sheltering
    efforts can be expected and are being promoted for different
    neighborhoods  such	as DRIs and mobile home parks.   If  a	more
    m indepth	review  of	private resources is	undertaken,	and	such
    effort	incorporated	into public plans,	the  shelter	needs  of
    residents	will be more closely met and out-of-county	evacuation
     estimates	made	in Part II can be reduced.   The volume  of	in-
    co.unty  shelter	needs, that. is yet unmet varies frow-coaai;y.   t ,:, '"
    codnty and storm category'to storm category.  This is depicted in
    *    T<able TV-5.
    TV-5

    TABLE IV-5

    __~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I
    UNMET IN-COUNTY PUBLIC OR PRIVATE SHELTER DEMAND

    Number of Evacuees
    with Unmet Needs	Space Need (000)
    County    Category	July	November	July     November

    Collier       1	31,112	42,389         622      847
    2                                                               I
    ~2	50,208	63,752	1,004	1,275
    3	80,885	94,740	1,618	1,895

    Lee          1	64,376	87,974	1,287	1,758
    2	120,404	145,864	2,410	2,917
    3	150,681	176,391	3,021	3,521.

    Charlotte    1	18,305	23,036	366	461
    2	33,336	38,273	667	765
    3	50,053	56,510       1,001    1,130

    Sarasota     1	11,266	21,795	225	435
    2	18,715	29,839	374	597
    3	34,592	49,112	692	982

    Excludes 34% of evacuees as "out of county" bound due to own
    desires

    Providing  more  space is one option.   Reducing space	for	each
    evacuee  is  another option.   Some areas propose less	than	our
    Region's 20-square feet per person (enclosed, including sanitary,
    kitchen,  recreation,  medical,  and administration  facilities),
    going as low as 10-square feet or lower.  Whereas  there has been
    some  discussion in other areas to use a 10 square-foot standard,
    that has been proposed for only very short times and often
    excludes sanitary, kitchen, and administrative facilities.

    If  the  approach of using a lower standard is  undertaken,  this
    report analyzes only the impact of funnelling 24% of evacuees to
    public shelters on a county-wide basis.   This 24% reflects those
    with  a  stated  desire in 1981 to go to a  shelter.   It  leaves
    totally unaccounted for the 21% of "don't know" respondents who
    are  apt	to follow a public official's direction as to the  best
    approach	to follow.   Table IV-6 depicts the impact  on  shelter
    space of 24% going to the existing declared shelters.

    TABLE IV-6                                       |
    THE REDUCED SPACE OPTION

    Public Shelter	Square        Per Person
    Bound Evacuees	Footage         Average
    County   Category	July	November	Available	July	November

    Collier     1	19,195	23,550	244,000	12.7	10.4
    2	23,398	28,229	144,000	6.2	5.1
    'D    :  '"3 -.	32:,519	37,959	1. 44,000:-,	4.4. :3'.. .:';'.

    TV-6                                           3

    TABLE IV-6  gContinuedl
    THE REDUCED SPACE OPTION

    Public Shelter	Square        Per Person
    |I~~~ ~~Bound Evacuees	Footage                        Average
    County   Category	July	November	Available	July	November

    |  i Lee           ]	45,108	53,689  1,193,400	26.5	22.2
    2	60,280	69,539	907,400	15.1	13.0
    3	63,368	72,717	471,600	7.4	6.5

    I      Charlotte   1	12,960	14,782	247,,.060	19.0	16.7
    2	15,969	17,905	153,140	9.6	8.6
    E	3	19,533	21,910	65,040	3.3	3.0

    *    Sarasota	1	16,487	21,263	401,900	24.0	18.9
    2	19,444	24,525	401,900	20.6	16.4
    3	25,466	30,937	401,900	15.8	13.0

    In comparison,  the Black Role of Calcutta housed 140 disciplined
    persons  at	1.8  square  feet per  person  overnight,  with  85%
    i      fatalities	due to suffocation.    If 10 square feet per person is
    assumed  to	be  the absolute minimum size (which  has  not  been
    determined) shelter space without adverse impacts on people, then
    3    only Sarasota County can meet this for 1-3 storm categories,  and
    *  0 Lee for 1-2 categories.

    Roadway Levels of Service

    The clearance of evacuation times contained in Parts II and III
    presume	an	average roadway generating standard of "D."   It	is
    possible	in	tightly  controlled traffic  movement  programs	to
    achieve	service	level "E" conditions,  which increased	roadway
    vehicle	capacity	by up to 40%,  according to the	1985	Highway
    Capacity	Manual.	This  reduces clearance times	be  a	simi]lar
     am ount. However,	normal  traffic movement combined with normal.
    traffic control usually causes service level "E" traffic loads to
    enter  service  level "F" conditions,  reducing  roadway  vehicle
     capacity	and increasing evacuation times.   Depending  upon  the
    event(s)	causing level "F" conditions,  (a stalled vehicle on  a
    bridge  blocking  a lane of traffic for example) traffic  volumes
    may severely decrease beyond level D,  C or even B	loads.   Some
    "F"   conditions  are  associated  with  according	like  traffic
    movement,  removal of the event does not remove the condition for
    some  time.   Consequently,  "E"  service	conditions  cannot	be
     expected on the overall county or regional	road network.   It	is
    possible,  however, to impose strict traffic movement programs on
    certain selected roadway links that create the greatest clearance
    3      time.   Table  IV-7  depicts  how  county  evacuation  times  are
    improved  with traffic control to "E" service levels on  selected
    links.

    �   �   -     �       .  ,i   - . ,.   �   . ~           J.~~~~~~~~~~~~~ _s ;  ' ...1
    IV-7

    TABLE IV-7
    ROADWAY SERVICE LEVEL REDUCTIONS_
    SELECTED LINKS (Quick Resp9ones

    Capacity             Time
    County  Category   Season	Link	"D"	'E"	"Di	"E"

    Collier      1          J	SR 951	1,036	1,728	7.4	4.4
    N	9.3	5.6
    2          J     CR 951   1,022   1,703	10.0	6.1
    N	12.3	7.4
    3          J     CR 951   1,-02Z   1,703	10.0	6.1
    N	12.3	7.4
    Lee          1          J	SR 78 &   1,624   2,662	10.2	6.2
    N	Hunter	11.5	7.0
    2          J	SR 78      812   1,331	18.0	11.0
    N	20.1	12.3
    3          J       SR 78      812   1,331	18.0	11.0
    N	20.1	12.3
    Charlotte   1           J    SR 776    1,022   1,703	7.1	4.3
    N	9.7	4.7
    2          J    SR 776    1,022   1,703	7.1	4.3
    N	9.7	4.7
    3          J  Kings Hwy.      792   1,298	9.6	5.9
    N	10.4	6.3
    Sarasota    1           J    SR 758    1,005   1,647	5.7	3.5
    N	6.7	4.1
    2          J      US 41    1,828   2,997	8.1	4.9
    N	10.0	6.1
    3          J     US 41    1,828   2,997	8.1	4.9
    N	10.0	6.1

    Mobile flome Park Self Sufficiency

    Mobile  homes  and recreational vehicle  residents  are  commonly
    expected to evacuate regardless of. whether or not their park or
    residential site is expected to flood.    This is because the home
    itself is less safe from winds than conventional structures.

    A   technique	currently  in  use  in  some  Southwest	Florida
    communities  is	to  require mobile home  parks  outside	of  the
    minimum	storm	flood area (Category 1) to have adequate	on-site
    shelter	space	for all residents.    This  section  assesses  the
    impact this would have if 66% of all mobile home residents stayed
    on site.

    a.   Shelter Tmpacts

    If  all  mobile  home residents desiring to shelter	in	the
    community  were able to stay on site,  there woul:d	be	more
    spaces  available  to  coastal residents evacuating	due  to
    flood waters.    Table IV--8 indicates the spaces that	become
    available should the approach be taken.    The stcrm category
    represents  all  residents  in that. zone 'and. igrea-ter;.	the; --
    shelter  space impact is on those spaces availabLe  for	the

    IV-2

    .~~~~~~~~~

    next lesser storm (i.e., Category 2 residents not going to
    Category 1 shelters).

    TABLE IV-8
    INCREASED PUBLIC SHELTER SPACE
    WITHOUT MOBILE HOME RESIDENTS
    Equivalent Shelter Space
    Increase
    Number     Percent
    (June Only)
    County
    Category
    Collier

    Lee

    Charlotte

    Sarasota
    2
    3
    2
    3
    2
    3
    2
    3
    610
    194
    5,250
    1,679
    902
    291
    4,300
    1,828
    5
    2.7
    8.8
    3.7
    7.3
    3.8
    21.4
    9.1
    The table indicates the greatest benefits are felt
    Sarasota and the least in Charlotte.
    in
    This issue is not relevant for Glades and Hendry County
    since virtually all evacuees are mobile home residents.

    b.   Evacuation Time Impacts

    The report has the assumption that 34% of all residents in
    the area will want to leave the area, regardless of whether
    or not there is local space available.  This section assumes
    that is true for mobile home residents also.   However,  on-
    site sheltering then reduces the out-of-county (and in
    county)	loading times.	These forecasts provided in  Table
    111-4	and	III-5  can	be	reduced  through	the   on-site
    sheltering	option.   Table	IV-9 depicts the	reduction  by
    county  in	hours and percent that the on-site	mobile  home
    option can have.

    TABLE IV-9
    REDUCTION IN LOADING TIMES, MOBILE HOME ON-SITE SHELTERING
    Storm
    Category
    Hours
    Percent
    County
    Collier
    1
    2
    3
    1
    2
    3
    0.2	5
    0.1	2.7
    0.1	<1
    0.6	8.8
    0.4	3.7
    0.]-     ~~<1

    0. 1	3  '3    :      :;;* .    - ~ ,"l
    0.1	<1
    Lee
    Charlotte ,    1
    -2
    : :.:    ;
    ' 2
    3
    IV-9

    TABLE IV-9 (Continuedl
    REDUCTION IN LOADING TIMES. MOBILE HOME ON-SITE SHELTERING

    Storm
    County      Category	Hours        Percent

    Surasota       1	0.6	21.4
    2	0.4	9.1
    3	0.2	4.5

    These   reductions   also	include	the  impact   of	fewer
    "conventional"   evacuees	leaving	because  there  is	more
    shelter space available.

    Individually,	the  impacts  on	each	county  are  somewhat
    significant,	particularly	for	Sarasota   and    Lee.
    Collectively, overall times achieve minor reductions, for
    the  greater storms,  but significant reductions for  lesser
    storms.

    Early Tourist Evacuation

    It is suspected that some tourists (hotel/motel residents only)
    would leave rather than experience a hurricane.  This possibi]lity
    can be more assured if public policy encouraged tourists to leave
    prior to the general public being told to evacuate. This section
    tests whether such action improves the community's ability to
    evacuate  and  shelter  persons.    In  effect,   shelter   space
    availability and inter-county loading times will be examined with
    the assumption that there will be no "hotel/motel" residents.
    Tables  IV-10 and IV-1ll indicate the improvement in area  shelter
    and evacuation times that such a policy would have.

    TABLE IV-10
    INCREASE IN SHELTER SPACE (Public and Commerciall
    EQUIVALENT WITH NO HOTELLMOTEL RESIDENTS

    County      Category        Spaces        Percent
    (June Only)

    Collier         1            1,188	8.9
    2	542	7.0
    3	242	3.1
    Lee            1	4,801.	7.4
    2	2,'842	5.9
    3	298	0.1
    Charlotte       1	906	6.8
    2	706	8.4
    3	46	0.1
    Sarasota        1.	5,027	20.0
    2	4,100	16.9
    3	2,955	12.8 '

    �& -    V,' .   . t-r'.                    . .
    I
    TV-10

    TABLE IV-l11
    DECREASE IN EVACUATION TIMES  NO HOTEL/MOTEL RESIDENTS

    County        Category        Hours      Percent (June Only)

    |I      Collier           1	0.4	10.6
    2	0.4	8.4
    3	0.4	5.9
    Lee	1	0.6	8.6
    Iz~~~ i	2	0.5	4.0
    3	0.6	3.4
    Charlotte       1.	0.1	3.4
    I|~~	~ ~~2	O.1	2.6
    3	0.1	1.7
    Sarasota         1	0.3	9.8
    2 0.3	7.7
    3              0.3	5.4

    Having hotel/motel residents leave the area early has significant
    *    improvements in the shelter space and evacuation times of several
    counties.   Regarding space,  the best improvements occur for the
    largest counties;  as far as times, it improves significantly for
    the  Southern  most  two and for Sarasota,  even for  Category  3
    storms.

     Survey Data and Use, the Feedback Loop

    The Original Hurricane Study made use of a newspaper survey to
     solicit responses on how people will behave.   Since the original
    study there have been a number of pre- and post- storm surveys.
    These have estimated hlow persons will behave and have assessed
    how they did behave.	There is not a strong relationship.   What
    did  become  evident,	however,  was that-the evacuees tended  to
    follow  the advice given by public officials:   if the	officials
    told	them to go to locally available public shelter,	they	were
     more	likely to do so than if the officials told them to get	out
    of  the  area.	What  is  becoming evident is that  there  is  a
    training loop.	When the original Hurricane Study was  developed
     the  popular  doctrine  was that there was adequate  shelter  for
    evacuees.   The study disproved that,  and pointed out that there
    were  shortages  for the number of evacuees  estimated  from  the
    surveys.	Since then, some public officials have been encouraging
     residents	that  they  should  as a  first  option  seek	shelter
    elsewhere.	This  will undoubtl:ably reduce shelter demand	-- but
    moves  the	problem  to  an out of regio-n  road network which  is
    too deficient for successful evacuations of the more severe storm
     categories.  This problem can only be reduced through either road
    improvements beyond those needed for daily use, or more county
     self containment.   Consequently,	it is not possible to	predict
     what   residents  will  do,   but	current  shelter  and	roadway
    conditions are inadequate for either the high shelter or high out
    of county behavioral response for Collier, Lee, and Charlotte
     Counties.

    I>o~~~     ~IV-I

    Vehicle generation was the other elemnent of the survey in which
    data was prepared.. This led to the conclusi-on that an average of
    1.1.  vehicles per household would be used in an evacuation.    ToI
    date, there has been no information developed anywhere that would
    disprove  this assumption.   What bas been added is a  background
    traffic estimate of vehicles "on the road" that are not  includedI
    in  evacuees'  vehicle estimates.   This is an  improvement  over
    previous studies vehicle movement estimates.

    Impa!ct of Evacuation OrdersI

    Again, the influence of training and-information i.s being felt.
    The  original  survey  and study broke 'new  ground' in  emergencyI
    management  and  preparedness.    The imanag"ers  today  are  better
    informed and educated then they were previously. This has led to
    improvements in actions and planning'methodologies that this
    study  has  tried to i.ncorporate.   The greatest  factor  as  yet
    inadequately assessed is the impact in which nature, the manner,
    the urgency, and the timing of an order given by an evacuation
    manager  will  have on an evacuees decisions  and  actions.   TheN
    preceeding  section of Part TV have tried to give some options to
    reflect this (more versus less shelter being sought locally; 2 vs
    7 hour decision times,  D vs E road ].oadi.ngs, early evacuation  ofI
    tourists). However, there can only be approximations. Different
    orders given to different localities will have different results.
    Future   updates,   and  more  specialized  studies  for  limited3
    geographic areas may develop better approaches to deal. with this
    issue.

    IV-1.2~~~~~~

    TECHNICAL APPENDIX
    PAGE #

    1

    5

    6

    7

    10

    21

    24

    28

    37

    38

    40
    Public Safety Policies

    Concept of Operations

    Debris Removal

    Accidents and Vehicle Strandings

    Special Evacuation Provisions

    Drawbridge Operations

    Evacuation of R.V. Parks and Tourists

    Evacuation Control

    Debris Removal Problems

    Dwelling [Init Survey

    Saffir/Simpson Hurricane Scale
    A.

    B.

    C.

    D.

    E.

    F.

    G.

    Hf

    I.

    J.

    K.

    *  i.   In  'the event the county jail must be evacuated,  the  first
    option for the approximately 50 people would be to transfer
    to  an  adjoining county.   The small facilities in the  old
    jail, located first floor in the County Courthouse could

    j.   Evacuated  areas  must  remain clear  of  people  unti.l  the
    I      ~~Sheriff  declares it safe to reenter.   The Board of	County
    Commissioners  will  announce  this entry clearance	to  the
    *public from the EOC.
    k.   Bull horn evacuation alert to areas ex cept mobile home parks
    covered by fire department.

    1.   Shelter  security  problems  are  to  be  resolved  by   the
    Sheriff's Department..

    Punta Gorda   Police  Depart-
    ment:    The  police  department
    is
    available for traffic control and crime prevention
    duties.   At any given time,  the department expects to
    I          ~~~have 12 men available for duty.
    The Florida H!igh!way Patrfol � or tile National Guard can be moved in
    for   traffic  direction  or  looter  control,   if  so
    requested through State EOC.

    The U.S. Coast Guard: U.S. Coast
    Guard may make the U.S. Coast
    Guard Auxiliary available for waterborne help.

    The Coast Guard should, with DOT, keep bridges open for
    I          ~~~vehicle traffic only after a hurricane warning is set.
    Florid a DeparEtment of Transportation: DOT local staff has agreed
    to hielp in state highway problems during an evacuation.
    This would be arranged through State EOC.
    COLLIER COUNTY

    In Collier County, the Collier County Sheriff's Department is in
    charge  of evacuation traffic control and law	enforcement.	The
    department  is  supported by the Naples Police	Department.	The
    Sbheriff's Department is responsible for all law enforcement,
    traffic control, and the department- assists in rescue efforts.
    As in CharloLte County, the Sheriff's Department can receive
    assistance from various State and Federal agencies.
    *                        ~~~~~~~GLADES COUNTY

    In Glades County, the Glades County Sheriff's Department is in
    overall command of traffic and law enforcement responsibilities
    in  the	event	an  evacuation  is  ordered.    If  assistance  is
    required,	*the	county  can request aid from thie Florida  Highway
    (C.' .�
    2

    TECHNICAL APPENDIX
    A. PUBLIC SAFETY POLICIES

    Each	county in the region currently has in place some  mechanism
    for	dealing  with traffic control along evacuation  routes.   In
    each county, traffic flow is likely to severely stress road
    capacities  during  the evacuation process.   Hazardous wind  and
    rain conditions,  and possibly tidal flooding, are likely to make
    this task all the more difficult.   Traffic will probably require
    rerouting around flooded or blocked roads as the storm worsens.
    High-standing vehicles (high trucks,  vans,  trailers,  etc.) may
    need to be removed from the routes because of wind conditions.
    Drivers and passengers in those vehicles will require alternate
    transportation.   One  lane of all evacuation routes is  reserved
    strictly for emergency vehicles.

    In  each  county,  law  enforcement agencies have  the  following
    functions, equipment and facilities.

    CHARLOTTE COUNTY

    Sheriff   (Public  Safety Building,	Punta Gorda  - 13  ft.	MSL:
    Englewood  Annex  - 8 ft.	MSL:   City of  Punta	Gorda
    Police - 8 ft. MSL)

    a.   The  Sheriff  or his principal assistant will be located  in
    the EOC with the operations staff.

    b.   Stations  traffic  controllers  to be  used  during  a	full
    evacuation  of low-lying areas.   A partial use of the	pre-
    agreed plan would be activated for traffic controllers in
    reduced scope evacuations.

    c.   Makes maximum use of automobile and aircraft public  address
    systems  to announce Board of County Commissioners' directed
    evacuation.I

    d.   When the EOC is manned,  the Sheriff shall coordinate	major
    evacuation  orders through the EOC as directed by the	Board
    of County Commissioners.

    e.   Provides	local. liaison  with  Florida  Highway  Patrol	or
    National	Guard personnel if used after such assistance	has
    been   arranged   through  CEFA.'   The  Board   of   County
    Commissioners is overall authority for local use.

    f.	Provides looter control over evacuated areas.

    g.	Operates as the senior law enforcement agency in the county,
    operating  under  overall authority of the Board  of  County
    Commissioners.

    h.   For hurricane evacuation, vans, boats, large trailer truqks,.
    or  mobile h'omes..'including R.V.s'-,   '"e.                    ;
    the evacuation routes due to high winds of 40 mph or more.

    I

    Patrol, the U.S. Forestry Service, the Florida Division of
    Forestry, the National Guard and various other State and Federal
    agencies.

    HENDRY COUNTY

    In Ilendry County, the Sheriff's Department is in charge of
    traffic control and law enforcement duties in  evacuations.   The
    department  may  call  upon  the agencies  mentioned  for  Glades
    County.

    LEE COUNTY

    Inventory of Available Resources for Implementation

    1.   City Police Department

    a.   Location of Office

    (1) Fort Myers - 1530 Reitman Street
    Fort Myers, FL 33901

    (2)  Cape Coral - 815 Nicholas Parkway
    Cape Coral, FL 33904

    (3)  Sanibel    - P.O. Box 438
    Palm Ridge Road
    Sanibel, FL 33957

    b.   Number of Personnel

    (1) Fort Myers - 102
    (2) Cape Coral - 42
    (3)  Sanibel    -  26

    c.   Number of Vehicles (type)

    (1)  Fort Myers - 11 marked
    2 trucks
    2 vans
    12 unmarked
    5 leased unmarked

    (2)  Cape Coral -  6 patrol cars
    2 administrative cars
    4 investigation cars

    (3)  Sanibel    -  4 patrol cars (includes 2
    four-wheel drive vehicles)

    2.   Lee County Sheriff's Department

    a.   Location of Office:      2055.Anderson Avenue
    Fo'rt Myers', FL  33901
    3

    b.   Location of Jail:       2085 Second Street
    Fort Myers, FL 33901

    c.   Location of Stockade:  2501 Ortiz Avenue
    Fort Myers, FL 33905

    d.	Number of Personnel:	240

    e.	Number of Vehicles:	33 patrol cars (marked)
    7special vehiclesI
    (marked) vans, etc.
    I helicopter
    .6unmarked cars
    5 'motorcycles

    Traffic  control and security (anti-looti.ng,  etc.) will  be3
    performed by the Lee County Sheriff's Department, the Fort
    Myers Police Department, the Cape Coral Police Departmnent,
    and  the	Sanibel Police  Departmeint..   Security	and  anti-
    looting	enforcement  of evacuation areas will be	performedI
    utilizing the emergency lanes of evacuation  routes.   State
    law enforcement assistance, when needed, will be requested
    through  the  State  Division of  Emergency  Management  andI
    coordinated by the Florida Highway Patrol.

    SARASOTA COUNTY

    1.   The Sarasota County Sheriff is the Chief of Sarasota  County
    Law  Enforcement  Service.    He  will  coordinate  all	law
    enforcement   activities   Sarasota   County   (cities	axndI
    incorporated municipalities), business and industrial law
    enforcement services, and private and volunteer forces,
    including deputized and special officers.I
    2.   The  Chief  of  Law Enforcement  Services  will  operate  in
    accordance with the procedures set forth in Florida Statutes
    No. 31, and Chapter No. 252.09, to assist and support the
    Department of Emergency Management organizational plans and
    programs of the Coanty.3

    *3.   Chiefs  of the municipal law enf-orcement departments in  the
    County will serve as deputies for the law enforcement
    *    ~services  and will exercise command control over  their  own         *
    units.

    4.   The	Sarasota County Sheriff shall. assign a Liaison  Officer
    whio	shall coordinate law enforcement activities between theI
    Sheriff	and	the  Florida  Hfighway	Patrol.    The	Liaison
    *     ~Officer,	on	direction  from  the	Sheriff,  shall	request
    assistance from the Florida Highway Patrol for manpower  andI
    equipment as required.

    5.   Control levels:
    a.	Florida Division of Emergency Management
    b.	County
    c.	Municipalities

    B. CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS

    A.   During  the increased readiness period,  the Sarasota County
    Law Enforcement Service shall take the following actions to
    increase the service's readiness to carry out its mission as
    required.

    1.	The Law Enforcement Alerting List'

    2.	The Public Safety Annex

    3.	The Emergency Plan for care of prisoners

    4.	The plans for protection of vital facilities

    5.	The plans for assignment of law enforcement  personnel,
    including reserve or auxiliaries.

    B.   The  actions stated do not preclude the taking of any  other
    actions that the Chief of Law Enforcement services shall
    deem necessary to carry out the mission assigned to the
    police service.

    C.   The  law  enforcement  facilities,  equipment  and  supplies
    should be checked for readiness.

    1. Readiness  of departmental and  emergency  headquarters
    and/or support EOC should be checked.

    2.   Law enforcement emergency vehicles, communications, and
    all special equipment, such as crowd and traffic
    control devices.

     3.   Check  availability or gasoline and all other essential
    supplies.

    D.   Alert Law Enforcement Personnel:

    1.   Both on-duty and off-duty law enforcement personnel and
    auxiliary personnel should be alerted.   All  personnel
    should  be  briefed on their emergency assignments"'and
    departments.   Personnel  should  also  be  briefed  on
    shelters available.

    2.   Cancel  all  leave  for regular  personnel  and  direct
    auxiliary personnel to standby for duty.

    3.   All personnel should review shelter and survival  plans
    for their families..          '- -
    5

    E.   Station  uniformed law enforcement officers and pre-position
    traffic control devices as required to facilitate movement
    to shelters, such as signs, barricades and cones along
    movemnent routes as necessary.

    EXECUTION
    A.   Inform  all law enforcement personnel of the  situation  and
    put oni standby notice consistent with every day operations.

    B.	Alert reserves and auxiliaries.3

    C.	Test and clheck all equipment for oper-ational readiness.

    D.	Review emergency plans.

    RESPONSIBILITIES

    A.   The Sarasota County Sheriff,  as head of the Sarasota CountyI
    Law Enforcement services, will serve as a staff officer to
    the Executive Director of the Department of Emergency
    Management  stationed  at  the  Sarasota  County   EmergencyI
    Operating Center or alternate control points.

    B.   Communications for the law enforcement services shall be  as
    outlined in the Communications Plan, Annex IV to Sarasota
    Courity Peacetime Emergency Plan.

    C.   Transportation  units normnally assigned to components of lawI
    enforcement services will be retai'ned by that service in
    execution of the mission.

    The above information was adopted from the various counties'
    peace-time emergency plans and the Lee County Flood Evacuation
    Plan.

    C. DEBRIS REMOVAL

    During a hurricane evacuation,	the region will likely experienceU
    high  winds and heavy rains.	Trees,  branches,  signs,  various
    natural and man-made objects and trash will be swept or, washed
    onto  roadways.   This  debris wil.l tend to  obstruct  evacuation
    route-s  unless some mechanism is in place for its  removal.   All
    the counties in the region current ly.-have some plan for the
    clearing  of~ blocked  evacuation routes.   The following  is  an
    overview of county plans.
    CHARLOTTE COUNTY

    The Charlotte Couinty fire departments have heavy-duty 6 X 6
    trucks  for use in road clearing operations.   The County  Public
    Works Department has heavy equipment which can be used for road
    work.   This  equipment and its operators are placed on alert  in
    Lthe  evenL of a hurri~cane warning.* .In -cert...i-n -statjon. tiv>7

    Civil Air Patrol may be available for monitoring of evacuation
    routes. The Charlotte County MOPED Organization has offered help
    in monitoring conditions in hard to reach areas.  Volunteers have
    also made ten 4-wheel drive vehicles available for debris
    removal, among other uses.

    COLLIER COUNTY

    .In    Collier	County,   the   County   Engineer   has	ultimate
    responsibility	for  debris  cleanup  activities.    He	can  ask
    assistance from the county fire departments. Heavy equipment and
    multi-drive  vehicles  are  available for cleanup  work  in  both
    Il ..  agencies.

    GLADES	AND HIENDRY COUNTIES

    The   two  counties  have	discussed  the  possibility  of   pre-
    positioning road equipment or heavy fire vehicles for use in
    debris removal, but no definite plans have been put in place.
    Both counties have heavy equipment and fire trucks which could be
    available  for road clearing activities.   Since most highways in
    these counties are State or Federal roads, the Florida DOT may be
    available for road clearing.

    LEE COUNTY

    Lee  County debris removal responsibility is shared among the Lee
    County Department of Transportation, the Lee County Parks and
    Recreation Department and the equivalent municipal agencies in
    the three cities.  Each agency will be alerted during a hurricane
    warning and will standby to begin cleanup operations within its
    particular    jurisdiction.       The   Florida ..... Department    of
    Transportation  may be able to provide assistance along State and
    Federal roads.

    SARASOTA COUNTY

    Ultimate responsibility for debris removal in Sarasota County
    belongs to the County Transportation Department.  Besides its own
    staff  and   equipment,  the  department can  call  upon  private
    contractors to provide their own workers and machinery for debris
    removal.   The  Florida Department of Transportation is available
    for  assistance on State and Federal roads.   In the event of  an
    evacuation order, municipal transportation departments are under
    county control.   The County Transportation Director also advises
    the County Sheriff and the County Chief of Emergency Services  on
    the   availability  or  blockage  of  certain  routes,   so  that
    evacuation traffic can be maintained.

    D.	ACCIDENTS AND VEHICLE STRANDINGS

    The  evacuation	process  is  likely to  be  long  and	involved.
    Despite  the best efforts of law enforcement agencies,	accidents
    will  occur.   A  large number of vehicles are likely	to  simply
    br'eakdown  along, the route because  of ...pr.e-ex'isting	mechaniclv'"--
    7

    problems or inadequate preparation (failure or inability to fuel
    vehicle  or make necessary service to it).   Each regional county
    has mechanisms to' remove stranded vehicles and rescue injured  orI
    stranded motorists.

    CHARLOTTE COUNTYI

    As the senior law enforcement and traffic control offic:ial in thie
    County, the County Sheriff coordinates accident and rescue
    activities during a hurricane evacuation.   For this task, he can
    call upon the Florida Highway Patrol-and National, Guard units
    (requests must be made through the Coun;ty Commission).   In orderI
    to limit the number of accidents on countkr-evacuation routes, the
    county does not allow the use of vans, boats (or trailers) large
    trailer trucks, mobile homes or R.V-.s during an evacuation.
    These vehicles must evacuate before a hurricane warning is	givenI
    or  not  at all.	This is because of the danger that high	winds
    will  blow  these	vehicles  over  causing  accidents  or	route
    closings.I
    The Charlotte County fire departments have the authority to
    evacuate mobile home parks and share responsibility for traffic
    control  in  these places.   The Charlotte  County  School  Board
    provides five 66-passenger school buses, which might, in some
    cases,	be able to pick up stranded motorists.   Coast Guard	and
    Coast	Guard	auxiliary  units  can  aid	in	rescue	efforts	ifI
    requested  by	the  County Commission.	The	Peace	River  Power
    Squadron is available for water-borne or shoreline operations.
    Thte Civil Air Patrol, if weather permits, will monitor routes andI
    can provide instructions (by P.A. system) to stranded or trapped
    * individuals.  Once again Moped and four-wheel drive organizations
    will  volunteer  their,  services	in  hard-to-reach	areas.   The
    Charlotte	County  Police   and	Fire  Departments	have   heavy
    * machinery	and rescue equipment available for rescue	operations.
    The El Jobean fire department will make available a tow-vehicle
    for the use of clearing the El Jobean Bridge,  if necessary.   OfI
    * course,  County Ambulance and Paramedics Services will be on full
    alert.

    COLLIER COUNTY

    The Collier County Sheriff directs communications with regard to3
    rescue  and  vehicle remov al operations.   He  coordinates  these
    activities with the County Engineering Department which has
    machinery	and manpower responsibilities.   The Ambulance Service
    Director	oversees	the  operation  of  ambulances	during   theI
    evacuation	process.	Ilie also is backup coordinator	for  rescue
    * Operations.   The  County Fire Departments assist in rescues  and
    strandings, particularly in hard-to-reach areas.I
    GLADES AND FIENDRY COUINTIES

    These    counties   will   undertake   accident   and	str andirigI
    responsibilities in very much the same way _as Collier.	Howeve.r;

    the rural nature of these counties, as well as the volume of
    traffic they may receive from the rest of the region, may require
    the	assistance of Florida Highway Patrol,  FDOT and other	state
    and	federal	agencies.   If these counties are forced to	handle
    traffic  from	neighboring regions,  then the state  will	almost
    certainly need to step in.

    LEE COUNTY

    'Lee	County accident and stranding procedures are  virtually	the
    same	as those described under Debris Removal.   The County	will
    recommend that high vehicles such as vans, buses, trailers, boats
    (with  trailers),	mobile	homes and R.V.s,  evacuate during	the
    hurricane  watch	period.	They may not b~e allowed on  the	road
    during evacuation.

    SARASOTA COUNTY

    In Sarasota County, supreme authority, regarding accidents and
    vehicle removal, rests with the County Sheriff. However, much of
    the actual rescue, towing and vehicle removal work is actually by
    the  County Transportation Director.   It is this person's job to
    assure  that the responsbilities are actually  met.   During  the
    increased readiness period, the Sarasota County Director of
    Transportation shall take the following actions:

    I           Coordinate  and	direct	the  removal  of  all  debris   and
    incapacitated	private	vehicles  blocking  the  evacuation
    routes and coordinate and direct other emergency functions
    requiring heavy equipment.

    Position people and equipment at critical places along the
    evacuation routes.

    Advise the County Sheriff and the Chief of Fire Services of
    all roads suitable for evacuation routes.

    The   heads  of	the  municipal  Public	Works  Departments,
    construction	companies,      and   of	Public    Utilities
    Organizations	in  the County will serve as  assistants  and
    exercise control over their own units.

    The Sheriff's Department and Emergency Medical Services will
    ai.d in the rescue and transportation of injured persons.
    Thie  highway patrol and other statelaw enforcement agencies
    may be used along State and Federal roads.

    The  Florida  National Guard may be used to  supplement  the
    Sheriff's forces in accordance with their Standard Operating
    Procedures for hurricane emergencies.

    The  Civil  Air	Patrol  may  be  used  to  conduct   aerial
    surveillance  of	the evacuation proceedings and search  and
    rescue operations after the hurricane has passed.

    ~ � , ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.. ..-. .,,...,..
    9

    E. SPECIAL EVACUATION PROVISIONS
    In each county, there is a certain percentage of residents who do
    not possess,  or have access to,  an automobile.    There are also
    prisoners,  handicapped residents,  hospital patients and  infirm
    persons  who  require some special evacuation  provisions.   Each
    county is required to have some mechanism for transporting all of
    these people to safety.

    CHARLOTTE COUNTY                                     I

    In  Charlotte  County,  all evacuation- activities are  under  the
    direct authority of the Disaster Preparedness Coordinator.  He is
    aided  by  the following officers and agencies in  the  following
    manner.

    Sheriff -                                                                      I

    When the EOC is manned, the Sheriff shall coordinate major
    evacuation  orders through the EOC as directed by the  Board
    of County Commissioners.

    Provide	local  liaison  with  Florida  Highway  Patrol	or
    National	Guard personnel if used after such assistance	has
    been arranged through State EOC. The Board of County
    Commissioners has overall authority for local use.

    In the event the county jail must be evacuated, the first
    location for the approximately 50 people would be to
    transfer  to an adjoining county.   The small facilities  in
    the old jail, located first floor in the County Courthouse
    could also be used.

    County School Board (9 ft. MSL)

    Make shelters available to the American Red Cross                         3

    Provide five 66-passenger buses with drivers available at
    each  of  these locations concurrent with the setting  of  a
    hurricane WARNING:

    Englewood Palm Plaza Shopping Center
    Gardens of Gulf Cove (1)(Optional)
    Port Charlotte Cultural Center
    Promenades Shopping Center.
    County Airport

    U.S. Coast Guard Auxiliary

    Flotilla 98 (Port CharloLte/Punta Gorda) and Flotilla 89 and
    87  (Englewood) cover the county.   Flotilla 98  provides  a
    marine radio andi operator in the EOC where a desk and
    antenna  with coax cable are available.   Use of  the  Coast
    Guard Auxiliary for warning,  search & rescue, evacuation or
    assistance  for  disaster. victims would  communicate  the.se :.
    I
    10
    I

    needs to the U.S. Coast Guard in Fort Myers Beach to ohtain
    3 ~~authorization for their actual involvement.

    Peace River Power Squadron

    Operate   with  the  Coast  Guard  Auxiliary   for   similar
    assistance.

    ICivil Air Patrol

    Provide volunteer overflight of disaster or evacuation areas
    for  information reporting.   Airborne public address system
    I       ~~can be used for evacuation warningsi a,nd other communications
    as necessary.   Weather conditions,  as well as availability
    ofthe CAP and its one single engine aircraft, will control
    teruse.

    MOPED Organization

    I       ~~This organization will he helpful to gain access to hard  to
    get to locations.   Their continued help to confirm the list
    of disabled persons will make the list much more accurate
    I     ~~and at a low cost.

    IMud Tuggers

    The 10 4-wheel, drive vehicles from volunteer groups in both
    the Port Charlotte and Englewood areas may be requested to
    assist stranded evacuees and help in a variety of emergency
    uses.
    The State Division of Emergency Management provides advice
    and assistance as needed for evacuation problems and danger

    DOT local, staff has agreed to help in state highway problems
    I     ~~during an evacuation.   This would be,arranged through State
    EOC.

    I       UJIRS  operates  with  the  local  Welfare  Office  to  assist
    evacuation victims with a one-stop disaster center in the
    PCU Senior Lounge and/or Memorial Auditorium. These centers
    I     ~~would be set up after a Presidential Disaster Declaration.
    U.S..  Coast  Guard may make the US'Coast Guard  Auxiliary
    3       ~~available for waterborne help.

    County Public Works Department

    1      ~~Provide rescue and heavy equipment as necessary to help keep
    evacuation	routes  open.   Place  all  vehicles  and  heavy
    equipment	in readiness concurrent with a hurricane  WARNING
    5       ~~in resource staiging areas.  (Se-e I    7.
    I1
    I

    County Fire Departments

    Individual  fire departments remain on station until ordered
    to evacuate by the station fire chief, keeping the EOC
    informed.

    The  El  Jobean  Fire Department has agreed to  make  a  tow1
    vehicle available for emergency removal of disabled vehicles
    at the El Jobean Bridge during evacuations.

    County Health Department

    Review plans with local hospitaIls *for the handling of
    victims.
    Establish communications with the EOC to advise availability
    of medical services.
    Be prepared to handle evacuees medical problems, especially
    disease control and potable water testing.
    Public Medical Facilities

    The possible evacuation of one or all hospitals, ACLFs and
    car.e centers should be considered.   At this time,  a mutual
    aid agreement between care centers has been negotiated.

    County Welfare Office

    Coordinate with fiRS and American Red Cross for emergency3
    clothing,    feeding,    lodging,    social   services   and
    registration/inquiry of disaster victims.

    Emergency Medical Service

    In addition to normal emerge-ncy medical service act as
    transportation  coordinator for  disabled  evacuation.   ERI3
    Building volunteers to provide a 5 KW-electric generator for
    disabled shelters.3

    Disabled Persons

    F.S. 252.355 mandates that the Disaster Prepar'edness Office
    maintain   a  list  of  those  disabled  who  volunteer   to
    participate in a program to help them in an emergency
    evacuation.

    All agencies withini the county dealing in anyway with the
    dlisabled persons will be asked to provide a listing of these
    pe-ople- to the Disaster Preparedness Office.   Some of theseI
    agencies are:

    County Welfare	Upjohn Healthcare Services
    Conigregate Meals	Healtlh Plus (Meal_sq on Wheels)I
    *Area Agency on Aging  .	Florida flome Hlealthi Services-

    12

    HRS	Senior Services
    Tele-Care Program	Rome Health Service Inc. of
    I                Florida Power & Light         Charlotte
    Redicare                   Charlotte County Council on
    STAT Medical                  Aging

    The  list  of  disabled persons will be  maintained  in  the
    computer for easy access and updating.

    The ambulance service will transport special cases.  A joint
    effort with the ambulance service will keep this list
    current.

    Disabled shelters are located, one tor each evacuee staging
    area,  at:   PCU,	Port  Charlotte  Junior High  School	and
    Charlotte  Senior	High School.   A'small medical staff	and
    food supplies will be available in these American Red Cross
    operated shelters.

    The  list of disabled persons will. be updated no later  than
    June 1 of each year.   The billing contracts with thie public
    through the Florida Power and Light Co. is recognized in the
    Florida  Statutes  as a means of alerting the public to  the
    procedures for maintaining the list of disabled.

    Identification tags on disabled showing name and address as
    a shelter control method will be used.

    System to return disabled home after a disaster is the same
    I           as  their  pick up,  taking care that their  home  utilities
    function.

    COLLIER COUNTY

    Collier County divides all evacuation responsibilities among the
    members of an Operations Group, make up of county officials. The
    Operations  Group is coordinated by,  and advises,  the Emergency
    Preparedness  Coordinator  (EPC).   Under the EPC for  evacuation
    purposes, are the County Manager and various county officers.
    Responsibilities   with  regard  to  special  evacuation  are  as
    follows:

    3     Sheriff:  Responsible  for all law enforcement,  traffic control,
    and assists in rescue efforts.

    County Health  Officer:   Staffs  shelter facilities  as  needed,
    obtains medical data and supplies, disseminates medical.
    and  health  bulletins  to public  through  the  Public
    Information Officer (PTO).   Supplies medically trained
    personnel.

    Ambulance Service Director: : Supervises all ambulances that will
    be used for transporting ill or injured or handicapped.
    I
    Will  be  backup	for communications  to  shelters  and
    'escue'efforts,  ..	e                               ..f      t...
    13

    Superintendent  Qf Schools:   In charge of opening and closiug of
    .shelters and assisting in food supplies.
    Red Cross Disaster  Chairman:   Will  furnish staff  for  manning
    shelters, food, and assist in med-ical efforts.
    The County can seek assistance from the Florida Highway Patrol,
    .National Guard, and various State and Federal agencies.

    GLADES AND IIENDRY COUNTIES

    Almost all residents of Glades and Hendzry Counties' live in mobile
    homes and will have to be evacuated in tl~e event of a hurricane.
    The counties keep lists of people requiring special services
    during	an	evacuation,  but  these individuals must	inform  theI
    county	if	they require help in  evacuation.   Help	is  usually
    provided by the counties' fire and Sheriff's Departments.

    LEE COUNTYI

    In Lee County, all evacuations are under the ultimate authority
    of  the Emergency Management Director.   The County  has  specialI
    provisions for dealing with handicapped, elderly and pedestrian
    residents.

    Several	public and private institutions within the county  wouldI
    require	special   evacuation  procedures  and   assistance	in
    transporting patients or residents out of endangered areas.	The
    following  is  a  listing  of the  major  establishments  and	anI
    estimate of the number of persons requiring transportation.
    -individual evacuation plans for these establishment should follow
    general directional routes for the evacuation zones in which theyI
    are located.

    Establishment               Evacuees

    Beacon-Donegan Manor	150
    Lee Convalescent Center	.140
    Shady Rest Nursing Rome	105I
    Shell Point Nursing Pavilion	160
    Serenity House/Cottage	24
    God's Missionary Church &	20I
    Mission
    Lee County Detox. Center         20

    The  move ment  of  these  persons may require the  use  of.-*busesI
    provided by the Lee County School Board.   However,  if buse s  or
    other Iiigh-standing vehicles are utilized, it is recommenided that
    they  move  only during the watch period or when winds  are  lessI
    thani 40  mphi.  The  movement of buses  or  other  highi-standling
    vehicles during the general. evacuation withini the warning period
    would  present  a potentially dangerous hazard  through  possibleI

    14

    overturning. In view of the limitations of vehicles available to
    evacuate those institutions, consideration should be given to the
    relocation  of  t hose  elements of the population  prior  to  the
    evacua;i.on of the general population.
    I 1980 U.S. Census of Housing data show that approximately 5.4
    percent of all dwelling units in Lee County did not have access
    to  an automobile.   Simple projection of dwelling unit  increase
    *  since  1970 would seem to indicate the number of  dwelling  units
    curreyitly without automobiles in Lee County is at lease 8,516. A
    system for the identification and evacuation of these dwelling
    I  units should be established.

    Inventory of Available Resources for Im'pld'mentation are listed on
    pages 3 and 4.
    Tt is recommended that all transportation of persons by bus shall

    take place during the watch period, not the warning period.

    ITo ensure the evacuation of those threatened residents lackinig
    traasportation, it is recommended that the Lee County Department
    of Emergency Management compile and retain a countywide on-going
    I	listing of those households without private transportation.   Any
    *	future  dissemination  of public preparedness information  should
    contain a request for the names and addresses of those residents
    needing  transportation if an evacuation situation should	arise.
    I. This  could	be  accomplished by a simple telephone call	to	the
    Department	of Emergency Management.   The listing could then	be
    transformed into a map showing the locations of such households..
    *  Emergency bus routes could then be planned from this map.

    SARASOTA COUNTY

    I  Overall evacuation responsibility in Sarasota County is entrusted
    to  the  Executive  Director  of  the  Department  of   Emergency
    Manaigement. lie and the other county officials have the following
    I  duties with regard to special evacuations.
    The Executive Director of the Department of Emergency Management
    *  shall:

    Alert government officials, departments and agencies in
    accordance with S.O.P.

    Exercise liaison with American Red Cross.

    Coordinate countywide emergenicy operations.

    Maintain liaison with American Red Cross officials and
    assist in coordination of emergency services t.o disaster
    victims.
    I1
    5

    The Sarasota County Administrator shall:

    Coordinate   the  activities  of  all  Departmnent  Heads  asI
    required.

    The Sarasota County Sheriff shall:

    Control established evacuation routes and coordinate any
    evacuation with the Police forces of each municipality.

    Call upon the National Guard for assistance as required.

    Provide security (one officer/shift) to each public shelter
    opened during the disaster.

    Inform the Executive Director of the Department of Emergency
    Management of non-functional vehicles or defective radio
    equipment.

    Control and coordinate evacuation of critical areas.I

    Establish safe routes for mass evacuation based on location
    of areas to be evacuated and availabi-lity of shelters.
    The Sarasota County Chief of Fire Services shall:

    Inspect  first  aid  and  other  rescue  supplies  and  fireI
    fighting equipment and augment as required.

    Inform the Executive Director of the Department of Emergency
    Management  of  non-funct ional vehicles or  defective  radio
    equipment.

    Assist with any evacuation as required.

    Telephione   the   Registered  Inform   requiring	ambulance
    transportation	to  the Special Care facility and	place	onI
    alert  to  be	moved.   Prepare  equipment  needed	for	the
    evacuation.

    Coordinate the evacuation of Inform and Handicapped and
    persons without transportation with the Medical Director and
    School Board Director of Transportation.
    Coordinate the return of handicapped and infirmed citizens
    to their homes with the Medical Director and School Board
    Transportation Director.
    Establish   mutual  support  agreements   with   neighboring
    communities and counties to provide personnel, supplies, andI
    equipment as needed.

    R?equest assistance from the Division of Forestry,- as needed.

    16

    The Director of the Sarasota County Department of Transportation
    shall:

    Designate and equip emergency standby repair and rescue
    crews.

    Inform the Executive Director of the Department of Emergency
    Management  of  non-functional vehicles or  defective  radio
    equipment.

    Provide   radio  equipped  vehicles  and  operators  to   be
    dispatched through the Sarasota County Area Transportation
    office  in conjunction with SCAT and School Board  buses  to
    pick up Inform, Handicapped, and nron-driving public, at
    risk.

    Make necessary repairs to essential facilities as required.

    Provide auxiliary power units to critical installations as
    required.

    Dispatch all other available resources as required.

    Shall advise the American Red Cross of the suitability of
    buildings for shelter use including the height of structures
    above level and its vulnerability due to flooding in heavy
    rains.

    Assign personnel with radio equipped cars to American Red
    Cross Public shelters.

    The   Director  of  the  Sarasota  County  Parks  and  Recreation
    Department shall:

    The Directors of the Parks and Recreation and the Building
    Construction Departments shall assist the Sheriff and the
    Chief  of  Fire Services as required.   They  shall  appoint
    members  of their Departments to the Handicapped  Evacuation
    Team and assign personnel. with radio equipped cars to
    evacuate citizens to American Red Cross Public Shelters as
    coordinated by the EOC.

    The Director of Sarasota County Environmental Services Department
    shall:

    Inform the Executive Director of Emergency Management: of any
    non-functional vehicles or defective radio equipment.

    Restore   potable  water  and  sanitary  sewer  services  as
    requi red.

    Assist  the  Sheriff  and  the Chief  of  Fire  Services  as
    required.
    '-":   :   '.".'; -
    0'.i'",~::
    �~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    17

    I
    Appoint members of his Department to the Sarasota County
    Handicapped Evacuation Team and assign personnel with radio
    equipped cars to evacuate citizens to American Red Cross
    Public Shelters as coordinated by the Sarasota County
    Emergency Operations Center.

    The Medical Director of the Sarasota County Health Department
    shall:

    Inspect and replenish necessary serums and other health and
    sanitation supplies to meet anticipated needs.

    Prepare  for the news media,  radio and television  stations
    appropriate public announcements and emergency instructions.

    Tf local hospital facilities become overburdened in a mass
    casualty situation, authorize and control. the use of locally
    available packaged disaster hospital components located at
    the Sarasota County Vocational-Technical Center.
    I
    I
    I
    I
    Provide   the  necessary  inspection
    specialized health service teams,
    situation.
    personnel  and   other
    as required by the
    I
    Provide nurses for duty in the Sarasota County Emergency
    Operations Center when it is manned for emergencies.

    The  Director of the Sarasota County Social  Services  Department
    shall:

    Support and cooperate with the American Red Cross in
    providing food, clothing, and other supplies necessary to
    the welfare of persons within the disaster area.

    Sarasota County Area Transportation Department shall:

    Prepare  to deliver SMATS buses and communications'  liaison
    personnel and equipment to the Director of Transportation
    and Communications of the Sarasota County School Board for
    use in evacuating infirm and handicapped and people without
    transportation.

    Assign   all  radio  equipped  vehicles  operators  to   the
    Emergency Operations Center for dispatch by the SMATS
    Department for pickup of citizen.s without transportation.

    The Emergency Medical Director shall:

    Contact  private medical and wheelchair transport  companies
    for vehicle and personnel availability during evacuation and
    repopula ion.   Sign  Memorandum of Uinderstanding with  such
    comnpanies establishing run rate prior to need.   Provide the
    Executive Director of Emergency Management with copies of
    the Memorandums of Understanding.

    '     :  '' .. . ..   -  ...  . .    - .' .. .' ,
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    J
    I
    I

    ,      ,.j;.  '. ;. :,        , ':", t ,,
    I.  .  ...  .  .
    .  .
    18
    I

    Provide radio equipped vehicles and operators at pre-
    assigned public shelters and establish radio communication
    between the shelters and the Sarasota County Emergency
    Operations  Center.   Provide the Executive Director of  the
    Department of Emergency Management with a list of the
    personnel assigned for this purpose.

    The Director of the Sarasota County Social Services Department
    shall:

    Coordinate  emergency  plans with the American Red Cross  to
    confirm procedures and mutual assistance for providing
    emergency feeding, clothing, and the,.sheltering of disaster
    victims.

    The Superintendent of Schools shall:

    Have  the  Directors of  Transportation  and  Communications
    establish liaison with:

    The  American  Red  Cross  for the  opening  of  public
    shelters.

    The Sarasota/Metropolitan Area Transportation Service
    for the use of SMATS buses in evacuating inform and
    handicapped and people without transportation.

    The Sarasota County Chief of Fire Services for the
    coordinated   pickup   and  delivery  of   inform   and
    handicapped and people without transportation.

    Designate	public   school	buildings	available   as
    Emergency	Shelters,   in	accordance	with  agreement
    executed with the American Red Cross.

    Close schools, send children home, and report identity
    of schools to be opened as shelters to the Disaster
    Chairman of the American Red Cross.

    Private  supervisory,   food  service,   and  custodial
    personnel for each activated emergency shelter as per
    prior agreement.

    Assure  that  school buses and drivers  are  ready	and
    available	for movement of families and individuals	to
    emergency	shelters as required by the Sarasota  County
    Department   of   Emergency  Management  or  for   mass
    evacuation as required.

    The  Director of the Sarasota County Central Services  Department
    shall:

    Staff vehicle maintained facilities for emergency repair.
    1_
    9

    !
    The Administrators of the Sarasota, Venice, Englewood, Doctors,
    and Sarasota Palms Hospitals, and Nursing Homes shall:

    Review their emergency procedures, augment emergency room
    personnel,   if  necessary,  and  check  supplies  based  on
    anticipated requirements.

    Inform the Medical Director of the Sarasota County Health
    Department of available hospital beds.

    Prepare to discharge non-critical patients.

    Prepare  to  receive patients requiiring critical  care  from
    medical facilities requiring evacuation.

    Sarasota County Friendship Center shall:

    Prepare to deliver Friendship Center buses to the School
    Board Director of Transportation and Communications for use
    in  evacuating  inform  and handicapped and  people  without
    transportation.

    The Disaster Chairman of the American Red Cross shall:

    Determine, in consultation with Emergency Management, if and
    when emergency public Red Cross shelters will be opened and
    to   provide  necessary  operating  staff.    Request  ratio
    stations to publicize availability of Emergency Shelters
    through the Emergency Management Public Information Officer.

    Open   and  man  public  shelters  and  conduct   in-shelter
    operations during the emergency,'

    Provide  food and water for evacuees in public shelters  and
    special support shelters.

    Establish  reception and care centers for  disaster  victims
    and inform the Executive Director of the Department of
    Emergency  Management of the victims location(s).   Open and
    man shelters as needed after the emergency.

    Continue to provide food, clothing, shelter, and necessary
    supplemental   medical  and  nursing  service  for  disaster
    victitus, as required.                                                  I

    Determine and announce closing of public shelters following
    a  hurricane in coordination with the Executive Director  of
    the Department of Emergency Management.

    Make arrangements for out-of-county reception centers for
    families   and   individuals  evacuated   from   neighboring
    counties.

    Arrange transportation, as required', for movement of persons           I
    to and from.emergency shelters and .t'o.hos-pitals-in-"instance,s..
    I
    2O
    I

    not  required  by ambulance.   This does not apply  to  mass
    movement from areas being evacuated.

    Provide for individual and family assistance.

    The Florida National Guard shall:

    Alert all personnel.

    Support the Sarasota County Sheriff as required.

    The Sarasota County Radio Club shall:

    As volunteers, supply radio equipped vehicles and drivers to
    support departments or agencies in disaster operations as
    required.
    As volunteers, supply radio communications and operators for
    use  in  emergency shelters as required by the American  Red
    Cross.

    Thie Commanding Officer of the local Civil Air Patrol shall
    perform aerial reconnaissance and assist relief agencies in
    the  distribution of medicines and other vital  supplies  to
    the disaster areas as required.

    F. DRAWBRIDGE OPERATIONS

    Many  of	the	region's  barrier islands and  coastal  areas	are
    connected	to	the  mainland  by  drawbridges.    Early.  in	the
    evacuation process, these bridges may be open to boat traffic, to
    allow  owners to take their vessels to safe anchorages.   As  the
    evacuation progresses, bridges are usually closed to boat traffic
    to  allow for evacuation of motor vehicles.   Drawbridge policies
    of the different counties in the region are described below:

    CHARLOTTE COUNTY
    Special Provisions for Drawbridges

    Special Consideration for Unstepping Sailboat Masts:

    In order to assist large sailboats to unstep masts for
    passage  up  the  Peace or Myakka River in  search  of  safe
    hurricane mooring, a service for./this has been planned.' The
    "shrimp  boat" side of Fisherman's Village  and  the  Punta
    Gorda Boat Club are staging areas for this service.  Boaters
    would negotiate payment directly with the crane operator anrd
    arrange for restepping service after the storm.

    The El Jobean Fire Department has agreed to make a tow
    vehicle available for emergency removal of disabled vehicles
    at the El Jobean Bridge during evacuations.
    .'',>   :....:'*   "'.   Ce"-.
    ":'~.... ';~  '~:?:"  ''
    !
    21
    !

    The Coast Guard should, with DOT, keep bridges open for
    vehicle traffic only after a hurricane warning is set.

    COLLIER COUNTY

    The County Hurricane Evacuation Plan has no special provisions
    for drawbridges.

    GLADES AND HENDRY COUNTIES

    There  are  drawbridges along the Okeechobee Waterway located  at
    Belle Glade (on SR 71), Moore Haven (US 27), and LaBelle (SR 29).
    Since primary danger to these counties will come from high  winds
    and heavy rains,  it is unlikely that thes'e bridges will be under
    any particular pressure to open for vessels.   These bridges will
    need  to  be  closed to vessels during dangerous (40  mph<)  wind
    conditions.

    LEE COUNTY

    It should be mentioned that Lee County has had one recent
    experience with a drawbridge mechanism malfunctioning during a
    hurricane  warning.   This  was  during the  abortive  alert  for
    Hurricane Floyd, in October of 1987. The Edison bridge draw (Old
    US 41) failed to close after some vessels had been let through.
    A recommendation is that the span should not be opened to vessels
    during  a hurricane warning period.   Vessels wishing to evacuate
    should do so during watch periods only.

    Special Provisions for Drawbridges
    I
    I
    Lee County has drawbridges at Alva (between SR 78 and
    Olga  (SR 31),	Edison Memorial (Old US 41),  and at the
    Causeway.   Of	these,	the Alva bridge will probably be
    during  an evacuation,	so that it could remain open to
    Bridge provisions for evacuation are as follows:
    SR  80),
    Sanibel.
    blocked
    vessels.
    I
    I
    It is recommended that no draw or swing bridges be operated
    during the warning period to prevent wind-caused malfunctions
    which might block vehicle evacuation routes.   They may be raised
    during  the watch period if sustained winds are not exceeding  40
    mph.

    SARASOTA COUNTY

    Sarasota County has the following drawbridges:

    Stickney Point Bridge
    New Pass Bridge
    Blackburn Point Road Bridge
    Albee Road Bridge
    Intracoastal Waterway Bridge at US 41, Venice
    Manasota Key Bridge over Intracoastal Waterway
    Ringling Bridge
    : Siesta:.Key: Bridge.:.     .:. i......-  '   ..
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    22
    I

    Hatchett Creek Bridge
    Venice Avenue Bridge

    Sarasota  County drawbridge openings or closings in  a  hurricane
    evacuation are based on the following evacuation schedule:

    The order of priority of evacuation

    |     ~ i. All    infirm,    and   handicapped   people    without
    transportation from all areas.

    ii. All residents of all keys.

    iii. All coastal residents on the mainland.

    iv. All mobile home parks on the mainland.

    v. All residents of low-lying areas on the mainland.

    Drawbridges  are open to vessel traffic only during  a  hurricane
    watch  period.   Drawbridges are closed at the point when  island
    residents  are ordered to evacuate,  and are not open until after
    the  emergency has passed.   The Director of the Sarasota  County
    Transportation Department has the responsibility (with the U.S.
    Coast  Guard) to  order  the closing  of  all  County  maintained
    drawbridges over navigable waterways along the evacuation	routes
    between the keys and the mainland,  and order all bridge	tenders
    to secure their facilities and leave for safer quarters.

    At this point, the Director of the State Emergency Management
    Division shall request the closing of all state-managed draw
    bridges in the county to vessel traffic.   le also makes requests
    m
    to  the  appropriate  municipal governments for  the  closing  of
    drawbridges over navigable waterways between the keys and the
    mainland, and in Venice to boat traffic.

    During the evacuation process, the transportation director has
    the  responsibility to see that vehicle traffic across bridges is
    I     unobstructed.  This involves keeping bridges free from debris and
    stalled/wrecked   vehicles.    When  the	storm  is   over,	the
    Transportation  Director  reopens  county	drawbridges,  and	the
    Emergency Management Director requests reopening of state-managed
    bridges.

    General Drawbridge Rules

    All  drawbridges  throughout the region should be locked  in  the
    edown" position duri.ng a hurricane warning.   Boat owners in each
    I     coastal  county must be made aware of existing flotilla plans and
    understand that vessels must be secured in safe hlarbor prior to
    or d(luring the hurricane watch.

    The United States Coast Guard has authori-ty over the operation of
    dr.awbridges and navigable waterways.  Working in coopOration. with '             t
    23

    state and local civil defense officials, the Coast Guard District             D
    Commander  will  order  the opening of a  drawbridge  only  under
    extreme circumstances during an evacuation.

    It  is  strongly recommended that appropriate  U.S.  Coast  Guard
    Regulations and Florida Department of Transportation procedures
    be  researched  and  implemented to allow each  county  emergency
    management/civil  defense director to assume authority to  modify
    normal bridge openings during a hurricane evacuation.

    G.  Evacuation of R.V. Parks and Tourists

    In the majori.ty of counties in the region,  there are no  special
    provisions for evacuating tourists.  Tourist establishments; such
    as hotels, R.V. parks, camping grounds, and resorts; are required
    by law to inform their guests of hurricane watch and hurricane
    warning  alerts.   It is hoped that visitors to the  region  will
    begin  plans	for early evacuation at such time as they learn  of
    the  alert.	County governments encourage  high-topped  vehicles
    (vans,  trucks,  trailers,  campers)  to  leave during the  watch
    period, as winds may endanger these vehicles during the hurricane
    warning	period.   In any case,	R.V.s are required  to  evacuate
    during	any  hurricane	warning	and  shelters	and	evacuation
    mechanisms  will  need	to cope with any extra	need	created  by
    tourists and R.V. owners.

    The  following  table  represents an estimate of	the  1987	R.V.
    traffic  for  each  county  for  both  July  and	November.	The
    percentage of traffic represented by R.V.s is also included.	An
    R.V. is considered to be any privately-owned vehicle used as, and
    equipped  for,  a housing unit.   This includes travel  trailers,
    customized vans and campers.

    July      Jully      November       November
     County	Total	%          Total	%

    Charlotte	124	.29           310	.66
    Collier         3,571	5.4	7,582	9.9
    Glades	337	N/A	1,667	N/A
    Ifendry	232	N/A            529	N/A
    Lee             2,635	2.1          6,006	4.1
    Sarasota          334	.30           759	.70

    SPECIFIC COUNTY POLICIES

    CHARLOTTE COUINTY

    Residential  vehiicles  represent only a very small percentage  of
    the	Charlotte County evacuation traffic (0.29%  - 0.66%).	Even
    :    so,	a  stalled trailer,  or a turned-over camper,  in the	right
    place, could backup traffic for miles in an evacuation.  Ideally,
    thc county hopes to evacuate R.V.s and mobile home residents some
    nine hours befor.e the arrival . of gale .force winds.-.  -.
    I

    :                           ~~~~~~~~~24-

    Tourist population, including campers and recreational vehicle
    users,	peaks	between November and April.   Thus,  tourists  and
    R.V.s	would	be more of a consideration in a  late-season  storm
    than in a summer hurricane.   All of the county's R.V.s would  be
    ordered to evacuate in any hurricane or tropical storm, because
    I      of  the possibility of wind damage.   Most of the  county's  R.V.
    parks  have no shelter capacity,  and this will require residents
    to seek public shelter (or hotels) or travel outside the county.

    I      It  is  hoped  that  R.V. drivers	will  leave  sometime  before
    evacuation  is actually ordered.	During the	actual  evacuation
    process,  R.V. evacuation may not be allowed.	The County rule is
    that:

    For hurricane evacuation, vans, boats, large trailer trucks,
    or  mobile homes including R.V.s,  will not be permitted  on
    the evacuation routes due to high winds of 40 mph or more.

    COLLIER COUNTY

    Of particular concern in Collier County are the large number of
    tourists or winter residents staying on the Naples and Marco
    beaches.   This will reach its hurricane season peak in November.
    Because of congestion of the Naples streets, the increased
    traffic  volume may be a problem.   Certainly,  U.S.  41  through
    Naples will become the heaviest traffic concentration in the
    County.

    5.4 to 9.9% of Collier evacuation traffic is likely to be
    I     composed  of recreational vehicles.	This is enough to seriously
    clog routes should accidents occur.	The County will order	that
    all R.V.  residents evacuate during a hurricane evacuation.	R.V.
    i     residents should follow the county suggestions:
    Trailer or mobile home owners should disconnect electricity
    at the pole or outside connection. Take indoors or tie down
    I
    all  loose  objects  in your  yard.   Remember  any  special
    medicines, baby formulas or personal items must be taken to
    the shelter with you.

    For those who intend to leave the area in advance of the storm:

    3          Tie down or place indoors,  all loose objects from your yard
    and prepare your home for high winds by lowering hurricane
    awnings,  closing shutters,  taping'windows,  etc.  Turn off
    gas  and oil supplies.   If you live in a trailer or  mobile
    m
    'home,  make  sure it is securely anchored.   All trailer  or
    mobile home owners should disconnect electricity at the pole
    or outside connection and turn off oil and gas supplies
    before you leave.   If you are taking your trailer or mobile
    home with you, leave as early as possible - if evacuation is
    officially  ordered,  trailers	of  any  sort  will  not  be
    5          permitted on evacuation routes.	_

     *~~~.....        . ' -   ~,*  ... 4'-*. :';* .   .:
    25

    GLADES AND HENDRY COUNTIES

    Most of the popu lation of the two inland counties live in mobileI
    homes or R.V.s.   This group is virtually the only one to require
    shelter  in	these	counties.   A very large  proportion  of	the
    evacuation	traffic	in these counties is likely to be  R.V.s	orI
    travel trailers.   lu Hendry County,  the largest number of these
    will  be  around LaBelle.   In Glades County,  most of  the  R.V_
    traffic will be in the lakeside resort areas.

    Tourists (excludi-ng R.V.s) are most likely to be located (in both
    counties)  along  the  lakeshore.    These  resident.s  should  be
    encouraged to le-ave the area in the evenit of a hurricane watch orI
    hurricane warning scenario. This will retfice evacuation traffic,
    and  make  it  easier for local mobile  home  residents  to  seek
    shelter.

    LEE COUNTY
    As  in Coll:ier County,  Lee County has a large tourist flux alongI
    its beaches.   Most of this tourist influx is toward Sanibel  and
    Fort Myers Beach.	A lesser,  but significant, amount of tourist
    traffic  is  toward	Bonita Beach,  and the urban areas  of  CapeI
    Coral, Fort Myers and Lehigh.

    Tourist activity in the County tends to peak around July 4 and
    Labor Day every year. This is offset by a large influx of winter
    residents  from  October  to  February.    In  fact,	the  County
    hurricane season population is highest in November.	Occupancies
    of R.V. parks are highest in this month, also.
    The County provides tourist establishments with information
    pamphlets, on hurricane preparation and evacuation, to distribute
    to  their  guests.   It  is hoped that  in  this  manner,  County
    visitors will be alerted to take the proper precautions during
    the evacuation process.   In general,  tourists and visitors  are
    advised to evacuate the area during the hurricane watch period.
    The evacuation of all travel trailer and R.V. residents is
    recommended  in any hurricane or tropical storm  warning.   High-I
    velocity winds caused by the storm would also create problems for
    the  movement of vehicles during the evacuatiou.   Large  trucks,
    trailers, buses, and other high-standing vehicles may be easily
    overturned by hurricane winds either while moving or parked.

    Lee County will have a fairly signifricant percentage of R.V.s in
    its evacuation traffic.   Vehicle estimates put R.V.  percent-ages
    between 2.1% and 4.1%. The possibility of these vehicles turning
    over,  as described above,  is a very real one.   Such	accidents
    could jeopardize traffic on County evacuation routes.	It is thusI
    recommended, that R.V. owners wishing to evacuate in these
    vehicles do so during watch period, or prior to the arrival of 40
    mph winds.   Consideration should also be given to the relocationi
    of this traffic prior to ordered evacuations.

    26

    Lee County Emergency Management recommends:
    that   those  persons  requiring  evacuation  using   travel
    trailers,  campers,  or other high-standing, wind-resistant,
    vehicles should evacuate during the watch period, not during
    the warning period when high winds (>40 mph) might overturn
    such  vehicles.   Upon  notice from the	National  Hurricane
    Center  (NHC) that Lee County is under	"watch"  conditions,
    the  Lee	County	Emergency  Management	Coordinator	should
    I          announce	those	zones which may require
    evacuation	if  the
    "watch:	becomes   a  "warning."   At	this	time,   those.
    potentially   threatened   residen-ts	using	high-standing
     vehicles should begin evacuation.  ;

    SARASOTA COUNTY

    In Sarasota County, the tourist influx tends toward the  barrier
    islands,	the  North  Port  area and the cities of  Sarasota  and
    Venice.	Tourist activity peaks during the summer of each  year.
    I  However, by mid-November, there is a significant influx of winter
    visitors and seasonal residents.   In most cases,  this influx in
    the winter is greater than the summer influx.

    It is the responsibility of managers or owners to notify guests
    of motels,	hotels,  apartments,  condominiums,  and R.V./trailer
    parks	of	impending hurricanes (or other  disasters).	Ideally,
    I     this	notification  should be during a  hurricane  watch	period.
    However, it is extremely likely, particularly in November, that a
    large  number  of  visitors will be involved  in  the  evacuation
    I     process.
    During a Category 1,  or greater, hurricane, Sarasota County will
    order the evacuation of all Recreational Vehicle facilities.   It
    is expected that this population will be at its peak in November,
    and  will  be  less  significant in  July.   In  general,	it  is
    recommended  that R.V.  owners evacuate during the  watch	period
    I     (prior to the actual evacuation order).  Shelters will be open at
    this time for those persons wishing to use them, but R.V. owners
    are encouraged to leave the county.

    In  a Sarasota County evacuation,	.30% - .70% of the traffic  is
    likely to be composed of R.V.s.	It is essential that evacuation
    of  these	vehicles  begins  in the watch  period.	In  a	large
    category	storm,  this large number of vehicles (in	high	winds)
    could present a very serious hindrance to traffic movement.

    Some combined mobile home/R.V.  parks have private shelters.   if
    flooding	from  tidal  surge is not expected in  the  area,	then
    residents	of the park may use their private shelter.   In	fact,
    they will be ordered to do so. However, if such private shelters
    *  are not available,  then park residents musti  either evacuate  the
    county  (during the water period) or leave their residences for a
    public shelter.   As in the other counties,  Sarasota -R.V.s  will
    II
    not  be  allowed  on  evacuation  routes -during  the  evacuatiion
    process.                  . ;(    ....                       .    .
    27

    H.  EVACUATION CONTROL

    No successful evacuation ever resulted from mass stampede toward
    safe areas.  If the evacuation process is to secure the safety of
    regional residents and visitors, then it must be ordered and
    regulated.	In order to achieve safe evacuations, each county has
    selected	certain  routes  which  appear  safest  in   hurricane
    conditions, and closed other routes which would tend to result in
    I
    slow or unsafe travelling conditions in a hurricane evacuation.

    CHARLOTTE COUNTY

    As has been shown in Chapter II, Charlottd"County is divided into
    three separate areas by the Peace and Myakka Rivers.   Thus,  the
    County's main evacuation routes must all cross. large stretches of
    water,  and  are  subject to  flooding.   An  orderly  evacuation
    process is essential if residents of endangered areas are to
    reach  safety  before  tidal or rainfall  flooding  makes  routes
    unusable.

    The County will station radio-equipped school buses at the
    following points:

    Palm Plaza Shopping Center in Englewood
    Port Charlotte Cultural Center
    Promenades Shopping Center - Port Charlotte
    County Airport - Punta Gorda

    Initially, five buses are to be on station with others available.              I
    These buses will not only provide transportation to shelters, but
    will also act as a means of monitoring evacuation conditions.

    The Charlotte County Sheriff and County Policy Departments will
    position traffic controllers at certain points on the evacuation
    route system.   The following is a list of traffic control points
    and route directios at each point:

    1.   Duncan Road (US 17) and SR 70 (northeast on US 17 or east on
    SR 70)

    2.   Taylor  Road  and  Airport Road (east  on  Airport  Road  or
    I
    *	~northwest on Taylor Road)
    3.	SR  771  and  SR  775 (only northeast on  SR  771  shall  be
    allowed)

    4.	St? 775 and SR 776 (only east on SR 776 shall be allowed)

    5.	SR 771 and SR 776 (northeat on SR 776)

    6.	1-75  and SR 776 (Harborview Road) (west on SR 776 or  north
    on 1-75)
    I
    7.   US 41 and Melbourne Street  (north on Melbourne Street)    '
    2
    28
    !

     8.   SR  776 (Harborview Road) and Kings Highway (north on  Kings
    I
    Highway only)

     9.   US 41 and SR 776 (Harborview Road) (east on SR 776)

    10. US 41 and Harbor Boulevard (north on Harbor or southeast on
    US 41)
    I
    11.	US 41 and Olean Boulevard (east on Olean Boulevard)

    |    12.	Olean Boulevard and Kings Highway (north on Kings Highway)

    13.	Harbor Boulevard and Coulton Avenue (north on Harbor)

     14.	Harbor  Boulevard and Midway Boulevard (only west on  Midway
    shall be allowed)

     15.  Midway Boulevard and Kings Highway (north on Kings Highway)

    16. Midway Boulevard and Edgewater Drive (only north on Midway
    will be allowed)

    17. Midway Boulevard and US 41' (only west on Midway shall be
    *|  ~    allowed)

    18. SR 776 and US 41 (only southwest on US 41 will be allowed)

    19.  US 41 and Locust Street (north on Locust or southwest on  US
    41)

    Certain general evacuation plans will be followed.  Staging areas
     will  be  the  Charlotte County Airport and  the  Port  Charlotte
    Cultural Center. All evacuation traffic north of the Peace River
     is  collected only Kings Highway and eventually 1-75.   If  Kings
    Hlighway becomes impassible,  traffic will be moved to high ground
    in north Port Charlotte and people will be asked to either remain
    in their cars or find public shelter.

    m The   US  41 bridge on the Peace River shall be closed  to	normal
    traffic.	Emergency  vehicles  will be able to use this	bridge,
    hlowever.	Only  emergency traffic will be allowed to cross  into
    Lee or Sarasota Counties.  HIowever, Boca Grande residents will be
    ordered  to  evacuate  into  Charlotte  CounIty,   and   Englewood
    residents will be allowed access to shelters in Sarasota County.

    If  the approaches to the Myakka River bridge at El Jobean should
    flood,  Sheriff's  deputies will reroute evacuees  in  appropriate
    directions.  All traffic on evacuation routes is required to stay
    in  the  designated lane (or lanes).   Any  remaining  lanes  are
    reserved strictly for emergency vehicles.

    All  draw bridges will be closed to boaters during the evacuation
    order.	It is expected that private automobiles will be the maiR
    t-'ffic	during 'the eva'cuation process.   I'n'oi'rder .'to.'e"iire6'th;:'.'': ''"
    29

    !
    safe evacuation of the endangered populace, this traffic must be
    carefully controlled.   However,  individual freedom of  movement
    will be permitted as long as it does not interfere with emergency
    traffic.

    COLLIER COUNTY

    In Collier County, there are now only three main evacuation
    routes available for the use of county residents.   These are	US
    41 and 1-75 north to Lee County and SR 846 east to Immokalee.	US
    41 is likely to be quickly rendered unusable because of traffic
    from  Naples  and  Bonita	Springs.	-Thus,	the  county's  main
    evacuation	arteries	will	be	1-75	and  SR	846.	All	county
    evacuation	traffic	will	be	routed toward	these	two	routes,
    whenever possible.

    This  routing will be accomplished by the stationing  of	Collier
    County  Sheriff's deputies at all major  intersections.	Collier
    County evacuees w:il]] be directed to travel north on 1-75 through
    Lee County to SR 82.  At this point, they may seek shelter in the
    Fort Myers area or continue northward.   Evacuees on SR 846  will
    be  sent toward Immokalee.	If conditions warrant,  evacuees can
    find	shelter in Immokalee,	or they may then travel north on  SR
    29.	However,  these evacuees should be warned that shelter will
    probably  not be available in Hendry or  Glades  Counties.   This
    will  force  evacuees to either seek shelter in Lee,  or  perhaps
    along US 27 in Highlands County.

    GLADES COUNTY

    Most  evacuation  traffic  in  Glades  County  will  consist   of
    residents living in mobile homes or RVs.   There is little danger
    of	the county being threatened by anything other than high winds
    or	rainfall flooding.   Each of the county's population  centers
    has at least one available public shelter. Therefore, all county
    evacuation control efforts will be directed towar the movement of
    evacuees to these shelters.  The county Sheriff's Department will
    likely  refuse shelter to out-of-county evacuees.   County	plans
    call  for residents of other counties to be routed north,	on  US
    27, to Hfighlands County.

    HENDRY COUNTY

    As  in  Glades,  most evacuation traffic in Hendry will  be	from
    mobile home/RV dwellers.   The county has. adequate shelter	space
    for  its own evacuees,  but is not prepared to provide shelter to
    evacuees from outside the county.	Out-of-county traffic will be
    sent  north  on  SR 29 to 11S 27.	They  will  probably	have  to
    continue	on to, at least,  Lake Placid before finding	shelter.
    Evacuees	passing  through Glades and Hendry Counties  should	be
    advised	to consider travelling to hotel/motel facilities in	the
    lake country or Orlando areas.

    30

    LEE COUNTY

    The  largest  portion of the Lee County transportation system	is
    within  the low-lying coastal plain.   This includes five of	the
    county's major evacuation routes (US 41,  SR 767,  SR 865, and SR
    *    867).	The	two  main inland routes (SR 78 and SR 80)  both	lie
    along	the	Caloosahatchee River and are subject to  flooding	in
    heavy rains.   The third major inland route (SR 82) is likely	to
    be  crowded with evcuees from Collier County.	Therefore,  it is
    *    important  that  county evacuation traffic be	moved  safely  and
    efficiently along these routes, and along 1-75, before storm
    flooding or heavy traffic make roads impassable.

    The county hopes to be able to stagger zone evacuations so as to
    be able to avoid cross-impacts on major arteies.   However,  in a
    late-warning or fast-moving storm situation, staggering might not
    be  possible.   The county's main object will be to move  traffic
    towards 1-75 (in the western portion of the county) and towards
    SR  78  and SR 80 (in the eastern portion).   The following is  a
    *    list of traffic control points in Lee County.
    1.   Bonita  Beach  Road and US 41:
    move north on US 41.
    Traffic will be allowed to
    2.   Estero Boulevard and San Carlos Boulevard:   Traffic will be
    allowed to move north towards the Matanzas Pass Bridge.
    3.   Summerlin  Road  and  Gladiolus  Drive:    Traffic  will
    directed either east on Gladiolus or north on Summerlin.
    be
    4.   Cypress Lake Drive and McGregor Boulevard:    Traffic will be
    directed north on McGregor or east on Cypress Lake.
    5.   Cypress  Lake Drive and Summerlin Road:    Tr
    east on Cypress Lake or north on Summerlin.

    6.   College  Parkway and McGregor Boulevard:    T
    north on McGregor or east on College.

    7.   College Parkway and Summerlin Road:    Traffi
    on Summerlin or east on College.

    8.   Summerlin  Road and McGregor Boulevard:    Tr
    northeast on McGregor or east on Summerlin.

    9.   Summerlin Road and San Carlos Boulevard:   T
    be allowed to travel east on Summerlin.

    10.  Stringfcllow  Road arnd SR 78 (Pine  Island):
    travel east on SR 78.
    affic  may
    move
    raffic may move
    c may move north

    affic may travel

    ,raffic will only

    Traffic  will
    1l.  Matlacha Bridge:  Regulation of traffic onto hridge.
    31

    12.  Gladiolus  Drive and US 41:   Traffic will be routed east on
    Six Mile Cypress.

    13.  Cypress  Lake Drive and US 4]:   Traffic will be allowed  to
    travel north on US 41 or east on Daniels Road.

    14.  College Parkway and US 41:   Traffic will be routed north on
    US 41.

    The  Lee  County  Division  of  Emergency  Management  may  place
    Sheriff's deputies or traffic control devices at the following
    points,  depending  on  local  evacuation  conditions  and  route
    availability.

    1.   Alva  Bridge:    In all likelihood,  the Alva Bridge will  be
    closed to road traffic during an evacuation.

    2.   SR 80 and Joel Boulevard:  Traffic will be routed west on SR
    80.

    3.   Bonita  Beach  Road and Old US 41:   Traffic will be  routed
    east (towards 1-75) on Bonita Beach Road.

    4.	US 41 and Old US 41:  Traffic will be routed north on US 41.

    5.	SR  31 and Bayshore Road (SR 78):   Traffic will  be  routed
    north on SR 31.                                                          'I

    6.   SR 31 and North River Road (SR 78):   Traffic will be routed
    north on SR 31 or east on North River Road.

    7.   Blind Pass Bridge:   Traffic will be routed south on San Cap
    Road.

    8.   Big San Carlos Pass Bridge:    In all likelihood, the Big San
    Carlos Pass Bridge will be closed during an evacuation.
    I
    However,  this depends on rainfall flooding at the  approach
    to the Matanzas Bridge.

    9.   SR 80 and SR 31:  Traffic will be allowed to travel. north on
    SR 31 or east on SR 80.

    10.  McGregor  Boulevard  and Gladiolus Road:   Traffic  will  be
    routed northeast on McGregor or east on Gladiolus.

    11.  Cypress  Lake  Drive  and Winkler Drive:    Traffic  will  be
    routed north on Winkler or east on Cypress Lake.

    12.  Sanibel Tollbooth:  Traffic will be routed east on Sumnmerlin
    Road.

    13.  SR 78 and Burnt Store Road:    Traffic will be allowed  north
    on Burnt Store or east on SR 78.

    1'4.  SR 78 and US 41.: Trafffic will be routed.,nort: .,n [S.:,..': .

    32
    !

    15.  Pondella  Road and US 41:   Traffic will be allowed north on
    US 41 or east on Pondella.

    16.  Hancock  Bridge Parkway and US 41:   Traffic will be  routed
    north on US 41.
    17. US 41 and Business 41 (north of the River): Traffic will be
    routed north on US 41.
    18. SR 80 and Ortiz Avenue:
    80.

    19. SR 82 and Ortiz Avenue:
    or east on SR 82.
    Traffic will be routed east on SR

    ai
    Traffic may travel north on Ortiz
    Cape Coral Police Department
    The  Cape Coral Police Department will maintain traffic  control,
    during an evacuation, at the following points:

    1. Ilancock  Bridge Parkway and Del  Prado  Boulevard:   Traffic
    will be routed east on Hancock Bridge Parkway.
    2.   SR  78  and  Del Prado Boulevard:
    northeast on SR 78.
    Traffic will be
    routed

    routed
    3.   SR  78  and  Skyline  Boulevard:    Traffic  will  be
    northeast on SR 78.
    Traffic will be
    4.   SR 78 and Santa Barbara Boulevard:
    northeast on SR 78.
    routed

    routed
    5.   SR  78  and  Chiquita Boulevard:    Traffic  will  be
    northeast on SR 78, or north on Chiquita to shelter.
    6.   Cape Coral Parkway and Del Prado Boulevard:  Traffic
    routed north on Del Prado.

    7.   Cape Coral Parkway and Chiquita Boulevard:   Traffic
    allowed north on Chiquita or east on Cape Coral.
    will be

    will be
    8.  Cape  Coral Parkway and Skyline Boulevard:
    routed east on Cape Coral Parkway.
    Traffic will be
    9.   Cape	Coral Parkway and Santa  Barbara  Boulevard:    Traffic
    will	be routed north on Santa Barbara or east on Cape Coral
    Parkway.
    33

    Fort Myers Police Department

    The Fort Myers Police Department will maintain traffic control at
    the following points during an evacuation:
    1.   McGregor  Boulevard  and Anderson Avenue:
    routed east on Anderson Avenue.
    Traffic will be
    .2.   Palm  Beach Boulevard and Fowler Avenue:   Traffic  will  be
    routed northeast on Palm Beach Boulevard (The Edison Bridge
    will  probably  be closed at some point  in  the  evacuation
    process.)

    3.   Anderson  Avenue and Fowler Avenue:  "Traffic will be routed
    east on Anderson or north on Fowler.

    4.   First  Street  and Monroe Street:   Traffic will  be  routed
    northeast on First Street to Palm Beach Boulevard.

    5.   Main Street and Monroe Street:  Traffic will be routed north
    on Monroe.

    S.   Edison Bridge:   The Edison Bridge will likely be closed  to
    road traffic at some point in the evacuation process.

    7.   Caloosahatchee  Bridge:    The  Caloosahatchee  Bridge  will
    probably be closed during an evacuation.

    S.   US 41 and tlanson Street:  Traffic will be routed north on US
    41.
    I
    I
    I
    9.   Fowler  Avenue  and Hanson Street:
    north on Fowler.

    10.  US 41 and Colonial Boulevard:   Tr
    on Colonial.
    Traffic will be routed
    I
    affic will be routed east
    I
    11. Colonial Boulevard and Ort:iz Avenue: :Traffic will be routed
    north on Ortiz.
    I
    12.  Colonial  Boulevard  and Summerlin Road:   Tr
    routed east on Colonial.

    13.  McGregor  Boulevard  and Colonial  Boulevard:
    travel north on McGregor or east on Colonial.

    14.  Colonial  Boulevard and Fowler Avenue:    Traf
    north on Fowler or east on Colonial.

    15.  Metro  Parkway  and Ranson Street:    Traffic
    west on lanson.

    16.  Metro  Parkway  and Colonial  Boulevard:    Tr
    routed east on Colonial.
    affic  will  be

    Traffic may

    'fic may travel
    I
    I
    I
    will-be routed

    'affic will be
    I
    I
    34
    I

    Sanibel Police Department

    I    During an evacuation, the Sanibel Police Department will maintain
    the following traffic control points:
    1.   Periwinkle  Way  and Lindgren Boulevard:
    routed east on Periwinkle.

    2.   Periwinkle Way and Tarpon Bay Road:   Tr
    southeast on Periwinkle.

    3.   Periwinkle  Way  and Donax Streetf   Tra
    east on Periwinkle.
    Traffic will be
    raffic will be routed

    iffic will be routed
    4.   Periwinkle Way and Bailey Road:  Traffic will be routed east
    on Periwinkle.
    5.   Causeway Road and New Bailey Road Connector:
    be routed north onto the Sanibel Causeway.
    Traffic will
    SARASOTA COUNTY

    During an evacuation, Sarasota County Sheriff's deputies will he
    positioned at all major intersections, and traffic lights will be
    turned off to allow the officers to direct traffic.

    Evacuation traffic will be directed in the following direct:ions:

    Loqgboat Key

    Sarasota  County  residents will travel south on Gulf  of  Mexico
    Drive to Ringling Boulevard and then to US 41.

    Lido Key

    Residents south of St. Armand's Circle will move north on
    Franklin Drive, or Boulevard of the Presidents, to Ringling
    Boulevard,  and then to US 41.   Residents:north of St.  Armand's
    Circle will travel south to Ringling Boulevard and over to US 41.

    Bird Key

    Bird Key residents will take Bird Key Drive to Ringling Boulevard
    and ITS 41.

    Coon Key

    Coon Key residents will take Ringling Boulevard to IlS 4 I.

    Siesta Key

    Residents north of the junction of TFigel Avenue and Midnight Pass
    Road,  will  take Hligel Avenue to Siesta Drive,  and then  travel

    �~~~~~~~
    	"1~
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~M
    '~    .:                  '          :           ..: ~'  ' -':"::'. ':'  ,; ~ '-.   ' ?     '  .'c'";',,   ,;' :.  .'
    '	'-'
    35

    !
    east  to  US 41.   Residents living south of the  junction  shall
    travel south on Midnight Pass Road, Ocean Boulevard or Beach
    Road, to Stickney Point Road, and then travel east to US 41.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~

    Residents living north of Blackburn Point Road will move south on
    Casey Key Road to Blackburn Point Road and on to US 41.
    Residents  north of 3300 Casey Key Road,  but south of  Blackburn
    Point Road, shall proceed north to Blackburn Point Road, and east
    to US 41. Residents south of 3300 Casey Key Road will move south
    to  Albee Road and then east to US 41.-  All residents  south  of
    Albee Road will proceed east on Albee to US 41.                                I

    Venice

    Residents  between  Roberts Bay/Curry Creek and Center Road  (and              I
    within  1/4 mile of the water) will take US 41 and/or the  Venice
    ByPass to Venice Avenue,  and then east to Venice Farms Road  and
    Everglades Boulevard.  They shall then travel north on Everglades
    Boulevard to 1-75.	They may take 1-75 to Clark Road,  Bee Ridge
    Road  or  Fruitville	Road.   If  wishing to  leave  the  county,
    evacuees should stay on 1-75.

    South Venice

    Residents  of the area between Center Road and Manasota  Road/5th
    Street (and within 1/4 mile of the waterfront) should proceed to
    US  41  and then north to Center Road,  and then east  on  Center
    Road.

    Manasota Key

    Those  residents living north of Manasota Road shall travel south              I
    to Manasota Key Road to Manasota Road, and then east to SR 775
    and	north to US 41.   Residents between Manasota Road and  Blind
    Pass	will  move north on Manasota Key Road to Mansota  Road  and
    then east to SR 775 and north to US 41.   Residents living  south
    of Blind Pass will travel south on Manasota Key Road to SR 776,
    via Beach Road, then northeast to SR 775 and north to US 41.

    Englewood

    All  Sarasota  County  residents living within  endangered  flood
    categories will proceed as directed by Sheriff's deputies.

    North Plort

    All  Category  I and 2 zone residents will proceed  according  to
    instructions from Sheriff's deputies.

    Sarasota  County Sheriff's deputies may redirect traffic  in  any
    manner necessary to ensure a safe, efficient evacuation.

    ~~~~~~i. i

    36
    I

    I.	DEBRIS REMOVAL PROBLEMS

    3	CCHARLOTTE COUNTY

    Charlotte   County   Disaster   Preparedness  does   not   expect
    significant debris to accumulate along evacuation routes except
    routes except in three areas.   These are State Road 776, between
    El Jobean and Murdock; US 17, between Shel.l Creek and the DeSoto
    County  Line;  and on SR 74,  from US 17 to SR.31.	County	road
    equipment will be used to facilitate debris removal,	along	with
    private contractors.

    COLLIER  COUNTY
    The only likely debris problem in Collier County
    about  3/4  of  the way to Immokalee.   The	area
    forested Pine Flatwoods, close to the road.	Other
    County expects no particular debris problem areas.
    is on SR 846,
    is a heavily
    than this, the
    GLADES COUNTY

    Information not available at this time.

    HENDRY COUNTY

    Information not available at this time.

    LEE COUNTY

    The  debris problem during a hurricane evacuation in	Lee	County
    would  consist  mainly of tree.g and/or  billboards.	The	County
    Division of Emergency Management foresees debris removal problems
    at the following locations:
    The entire length of San Cap Road
    1.   Sanibel/Captiva Islands:
    and Periwinkle Way.
    2.	Boca Grande:  The entire route towards Charlotte County.

    3.	Stringfellow Road on Pine Island:  The entire road length.

    4.	SR 78:  From Stringfellow Road to Chiquita Boulevard.

    5.	The Sanibel Causeway:  The entire length.

    6.	CT? 865:  From US 41 in Bonita Springs to McGregor Boulevard.
    7.   Summerlin  Road:
    Boulevzard.
    From the Sanibel Causeway to San Carlos
    8.	McGregor Boulevard:	The entire length.

    9.	Cape Coral Parkway:	The entire length.
    37

    10.  Del  Prado  Boulevard:   From Cape Coral Parkway to  SR  78.
    This is due to the heavy concentration of billboards on this
    road.

    I1.  IUS 41:   From Gladiolus Drive to the Caloosahatchee  Bridge.
    This is also mainly due to the billboard concentration.

    12.	TIS 41:  From the bridge north to Charlotte County.

    13.	Business 41:  From the Edison Bridge to US 41..

    14.	Palm Beach Boulevard:  From McGregor to 1-75.

    15.	SR 78:	From Del Prado Boulevard to US 41.

    16.	SR 78:	SR 31 to the Hendry County line.

    SARASOTA COUNTY

    In Sarasota County, the principal debris removal problems (during
    an evacuation) will occur along John Ringling Causeway.  The road
    is  heavily lined by Austrialian Pines.   This route is the  only
    road from the north county barrier islands.

    J.  DWELLING UNIT SURVEY

    REGIONAL AVERAGES

    # OF ESTABLISHMENTS

    APT.    CONDO    HOTEL/MOTEL    RV PARK    MOBILE HOME

    41        68          71               6            44

    # OF UNITS

    2,909      9,491       6,447          1,737        16,323

    AVERAGE # OF UNITS PER ESTABLISHMENT

    71.      ]40          91             290           371

    AVERAGE OCCUPANCY RATE (%)

    J	N	J	N	J	N        J	N	J	N

    70	78	51	64	40	50    .18	41	43	75

    In attempting to determine the size of the affected population it
    is  necessary  to  examine the occupancy/vacancy  rates  for  the
    various types of dwelling units.

    The  actual  rate  of occupied. units. (etti.mated	by -the- comp.l0 .
    o(wner/manager) by season is given i.n Table A.	The actual  count
    of complexes contacted is gi.ven in Table B.

    :! t3               '  ' 'I

    TABLE A
    % OCCUPANCY SEASONALITY

    APARTMENT    CONDO	HOTEL/MOTEL	RV PARK	MOBILE HOME
    JUlY/NOV_ JULY/NOV.	JULYLQOV.	JULY/NOV.	JULY/NOV.

    CHARLOTTE COUNTY

    50/70       65/70        35/55          20/30            40/80

    COLLIER COUNTY

    71/83      42/61         52/64          40/72            35/66

    LEE COUNTY

    78/80      53/62          5/20           3/21            43/75

    SARASOTA COUNTY

    80/80      44/61         68/62            NR             54/77

    TABLE B
    # ESTABLISHMENTS CONTACTED BY TYPE

    COUNTY  APARTMENT  CONDO  HOTEL/MOTEL  RV PARK  MOBILE HOME

    Charlotte	3	9	9	2	8
    Collier	11	14	22	3	6
    Lee	10	27	1.3	1	14
    Sarasota	17	18	27	0*	16

    SUBTOTAL	41	68	71	6	44

    ACTUAL UNITS BY DWELLING UNIT TYPE

    Charlotte	33	1,570       692	291	533
    Collier	589	1,962    3,519	242	873
    Lee	1,109	4,191       411       1,204	6,684
    Sarasota	1,178	1,768	1,825            0	8,235

    SUBTOTAL 2,909	9,491	6,447        1,737	16,323 -

    *No response from the few listed in the telephone directory.

    NOTE:   There	is  some built-in inaccuracy in the tables  above.
    For example,	in Collier County, there is a complex with th_ name
    Bonita	Beach Apiartments and Motel.   Because of	the	name,  the
    units	have  been divided between the apartment	and	hotel/motel
    categor ics when , in actuality, because of their location and usc,
    all  the units should probably have been listed under hotel/motel
    only.

    Th is  prol I)m  occurred in all counties and most often  near  the
     st;ls: wh:ere seasonal:.. r-ates: are able .to comma.nd h.igheb: ii-. es;:. ...-.:;-:;  ., .ii
    39

    Likewise,	the  line	between mobile home parks and RV	parks	is
    sometimes	blurred.	Many  RV  and mobile home  parks	also	had
    answering	machines indicating the parks were only open	in	high
    season (Nov./Dec. to March).

    K.  THE SAFFIR/S_IMPSON HURRICANE SCALE

    The  Saffir/Simpson  Hurricane  Scale  is used  by	the  National
    Weather  Service  to give public safety  officials	a  continuing
    assessment  of the potential for wind and storm surge damage from
    a  hurricane in progress.   Scale numbers are made  available	to
    pub] i.c  safety  officials when a hurricane is within 72 hours	of
    landfzall.    Scale  assessments  are  revised  regularly  as	new
    observations are made,  and public safety organizations are	kept
    informed of new estimates of the hurricane's disaster potential.

    Scale  numbers  range  from 1 to 5.   Scale  No.  I  begins  with
    hurricanes  in which the maximum sustained winds are at least  74
    mph, or which will produce a storm surge 4 to 5 feet above normal
    water  level,  while  Scale No.  5 applies to those in which	the
    maximum  sustained  winds are 155 mph or  more,  which  have	the
    potential  of  producing  a storm surge more than 18  feet  above             |
    normal.

    The scale was developed by Herbert Saffir,  Dade County,  Florida
    consulting engineer,  and Dr.	Robert H. Simpson, former National
    Hurricane   Center  director,	and  projects  scale   assessment
    categories as follows:

    Category No. 1 - Winds of 74 to 95 mph.  Damage primarily to
    shrubbery,  trees, foliage, and unanchored mobile homes.  No
    real  damage	to other structures.   Some damage  to	poorly
    constructe(d	signs.   Storm surge 4 to 5 feet above	normal.
    Low-lying coastal roads inundated, minor pier damage, some
    small craft in exposed anchorage torn from moorings.

    Category  No.  2  - Winds of 96 to  110  mph.   Considerable
    damage to shrubbery and tree foliage; some trees blown down.
    Major  damage to exposed mobile homes.   Extensive damage to
    poorly constructed signs.   Some damage to roofing materials
    of buildings;  some window and door damage.	No major damage
    to  building:;.	Storm  surge  6 to  8  feet	above	normal.
    Coastal	roads	and  low-lying escape routes inland	cut  by
    risiIng	water two to four hours before arrival of	hurricane
    center.   Considerable  damage --to  iers.   Marinas	flooded.
    Small  craft in unprotected anchorages torn  from	moorings.
    Evacuation of some shoreline residences and low-lying island
    areas required.

    Category No. 3 - Winds of 111 to 130 mph.  Foliage torn from
    trees;  large  trees  blown down.	Practically	all	poorly
    constructed  signs  blown  down.	Some  damage	to	roofing
    materials of buildings;	some window and door damage.   Some
    struc.tural   damage  to	small.  bui.ldings.  M.ohi L .. . Iom .....

    40
    I

    destroyed.   Storm surge 9 to 12 feet above normal.  Serious
    flooding at coast and many smaller structures near coast
    destroyed;  large structures near coast damaged by battering
    waves  and floaLing debris.   Low-lying escape routes inland
    cut by rising water three to five hours before hurricane
    center arrives.  Flat terrain 5 feet or less above sea level
    flooded  inland 8 miles or more.   Evacuation  of	low-lying
    residences  within  several  blocks  of  shoreline	possibly
    required.

    Category No.	4 -- Winds of 131 to 155 mph.  Shrubs and trees
    blown  down;	all signs down.   Extensive damage to  roofing
    materials, windows, and doors. Complete failure of roofs on
    many  small  residences.	Complete '"destruction  of  mobile
    homes.	Storm  surge  13	to 18 feet  above  normal.   Flat
    terrain	]0 feet or less above sea 'level flooded	inland	as
    far  as	six  miles.    Major  damage  to  lower	fl. oors	to
    structures near shore due to flooding and battering by waves
    and floating debris.   Low-lying escape routes inland cut by
    rising water three to five hours before hurricane center
    arrives.   Major erosion of beaches.   Massive evacuation of
    all residences within 500 yards of shore possibly required,
    and  of  single-story residences on low  ground  within  two
    miles of shore.

    Category  No.  5 - Winds greater than 155 mph.   Shrubs  and
    trees blown down; considerable damage to roofs of buildings;
    all   signs  down.    Complete  failure  of  roofs  on  many
    residences and industrial buildings.   Extensive  shattering
    of  glass  in. windows and doors.   Some  complete  building
    failures.    Small  buildings  over-turned  or  blown  away.
    Complete destruction of mobile homes.   Storm surge  greater
    than 18 feet above normal.   Major damage to lower floors of
    all structures less than 15 feet above sea level within 500
    yards  of  shore.   Low-lying escape routes  inland  cut  by
    rising water three to five hours before hurricane center
    arrives.   Massive  evacuation  of residential areas on  low
    ground within five to ten miles of shore possibly required.

    Dr.  Neil Frank,  present National Hurricane Center Director, has
    adapted atmospheric pressure ranges to the Saffir/Simpson  Scale.
    These pressure ranges,  along with a numerical  break--down of wind
    andi storm surge ranges are:

    Scale          Central Pressures	Winds	Surge
    Number     Mi.] li bars	Inches	(mph)	(ft.)	Damage

    I1            980	28.94	74-95	4--5	Mi nima 1
    2	965-979	28.5- 28.91	96-110	6-8	Moderate
    3	9415-964	27.91-28.47	ll-130	9-12	Extensive
    4	920:--944	27.17-27.88	131-155	13-1.8	Extreme
    5             920           27.17      155-i	18	Catastrophic
    41

    SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

    A   Report   on  Flood  Hazard  Mitigation.    National   Science
    Foundation. Washington, D.C.: 1980.

    Adopted Five Year Transportation Plan July 1 1987 - June 30,
    1992.   Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee:  June,
    1987.

    Baker, Earl J. Hurricanes and Coastal Storms: A Resource Paper
    on  Risk  Assessmentz Warning  Response,  Non-Structura  -Damage
    Mitigation.   and   Awareness.    Tallahassee:    Florida   State
    inlversly, Departmefint-f-Gography, 1979.
    Bureau of Economic and Business Research, Population Division.
    Florida  Estimates of Popujlation.   Gainesville:   University  of
    Florida, April, 1987.

    Butler,  John P., ed. et. al.  Emergency Preparedness_ Evacuation
    and Relief Team iEPERT2:  Planning for Hurricane or Other Natural
    Disaster.	Sanibel:  1977.

    Charlotte	County  Peacetime Emergency  Plan.   Charlotte  County
    Emergency Management.  Punta Gorda:  June, 1985.

    Coastal   Area	Planning	and	Development   Commission.         A
    CoordinationL	Education,	and	Mitigation  Model	for	Disaster
    Preparedness	in  Coastal	Areas.	Prepared  for	the	Federal
    Emergency Management Administration.	Brunswick:	1980.

    Collier   County  Peacetime  Emergency  Plan.	Collier   County
    Emergency Management.  Naples:	January, 1985.

    Collier  County  Transportation	Improvement  Program  1988-1.992.
    Collier County Metropolitan Planning Organization: June, 1987.

    Glades  County Comprehensive Emergency Management  Plan.   Glades
    County Emergency Management:  1987.

    Griffith,	David A., "Coastal Hazard Management:  A Challenge for
    Florida",	Florida Environmental and Urban Issues,  2 (1980), Ft.
    Lauderdale.

    Ifendry  County Comprehensive Emergency Management  Plan.   Hendry
    County Emergency Management.  LaBelle:  June, 1985.

    Highway Capacity Manual,  1985,   Transportation Research  Board,
    National Research Council,  Special Report No.  209:  Washington,
    D.C.:  1985.

    lHurricane	Evacuation  Plan:    A  Model  for  Florida's  Coastal
    Counties.	Florida Department of Community Affairs,  Division of
    Dlisaster Preparedness.  Tallahassee:  1978.

    Hurricanes  and  Coastal xtom:        Awareness.  Evacuation~ and
    M4itigatjion.	(Papers pres.ented at a national conferevice held May
    29-31, 1979.)	Baker, Farll.;J.. ed. et. al.  Gainesv-ille:  1980.

    Lee  County Hurricane Sheater Survey.   Lee County Department  Of
    Emergency Management. Ft.,.,Myers: 1987.
    Lee  County Peacetime Emergency Pa. Lee County Department  of
    Emergency Management. Ft. Myers: April', 1985.
    Lee  C,ounty  TKrnsp2rtati-on Improvement	Prga 1988-1992.   LeeI
    County Metropolitan Planning Organizati.on.	May, 1987.

    McDonald,	James R.  and-.---W.  Pennington	Van.   An  Engineering
    Apnaysis:	Mobi-le  ETomesvi-in Wind-atorms.	Prepared for  National.
    Weather Servi.ce, National-r-Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
    Lubbock: Texas Tech Un!.i~ersity, 1978.

    National Governor's Ass6ciation Center for Policy Research.
    ComprEhensive   Emnergenc~ypn ManageLaent:    A   Governor's   Guide.
    Washington, D.C.:  U.S- Government Printing Office, 1979.

    Neumnann,	C.J.,  G.W.  Cry, F.L. Caso and B.R. Jarvinen, Tropical
    Cyclonpes	of  the North Altlantic  Ocean_, 1871-1977.   Asheville,
    N.C.: -197-8.- --------

    Division  of Emergency..'Man-agement.   State of  Florida  Peacetime
    Emer-jgency Plan.- Talld;ha~shee:  1979.
    Sarasota  County  Peacetime  Emergency  Plan.-   Sarasota  County
    Emergency Management..-Sarasota:  September, 1.983.3
    Sar3sota-Manatee    Ar6af-- .Transportation    Study/Tra~nsportationl
    Improve~ment  ProgramN .. Sarasota-Bradenton Metropolitan  Planning
    O-rganization, June l8~
    Sheared Coordinate Sys,'emL for Storm Surge Eguations of Motion
    with  a  Mildly Curved  Coast.   Chester  P.  Jelesnianski,  NOAAI
    Technical Memorandum, NWSN`,TDL-61. Silver Spring, Md.
    Simpson	RobertH.	anda. Herbrt Ri-ehl,  The Hurricane and  Its  f
    Impa!ct.	Baton Rouge:	LSUJ Press, 1981.U

    SPLASII (SpeSial  Prograiqr' to  List  Amplitudes  of  Surges  from
    Hlurri cane s)  Part 2:  GenCeral Track and Variant Storm Conditions.I
    Chiester P. Jelesniansk:i;k NOAA Technical Memorandum NWS TDL-62.
    SilIver Spring, Md.

    SLOSH tSqa, Lake and Ovel~lan d Surges 'from TIurric anes}.   Chester
    >:.jelesnianski  a:nd J. :J3Chen.   10AT,hi..,-e
    Preparation.  Sil Ver Spri-pg, Md.

    Southwest   Florida   Reglional   Planning   Council..  Regional
    Comprehensive Policy P lahli Fort Myers, 1.987.

    [        Storm  Tide Flooding in Lee  County,  Florida.   Special;  report
    prepared for the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council.
    s    ~ISR 8-07.   Houston,  Texas:   UJniversity of St. Thomas Institute
     for Storm Research, 1978.

    Tampa	Bay  Regional Hurricane Evacuation  Plans  Technical  Data
    *  ,	Report	llpdate.   St.  Petersburg:   Tampa Bay Regional.  Planning
    ~*	Council, 1979.  ,

    ....    Technical   Data  Report:    Ilurricane  Evacuation  Plan.
    I      iPrepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville District.
    St. Petersburg:  Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council, 1981.

    |      Texas  Transportation	Institute.    Texas	Hurricane  Evacuation
    Study.   Prepared  for	the  Texas Coastal	and  Marine  Council.
    College Station: Texas A & M UJniversity, 1978.

    I     _Tropical  Cyclone Data Tape for the North Atlantic  Basint  1886--
    1977:   Contents,  Limitations-  and Uses.  Brian R. Jarvinen and
    *s  :  E.L. Caso.  NOAA Technical. Memorandum NWS NOP 6.  Miami:  1978.